Energy and carbon accounting
Measure energy, define emissions boundaries, and compare AI systems using explicit functional units and uncertainty.
On this page
The question for today
What you’ll understand
- Convert time-varying power measurements into energy.
- Separate operational and allocated embodied emissions.
- Compare equivalent useful work without confusing energy efficiency and carbon intensity.
A shorter training run does not necessarily consume less electricity, and lower electricity use does not always imply lower estimated emissions. A faster device may draw more power; two datacenters may use electricity with different carbon intensities. Research needs a declared accounting boundary and a useful unit of output. Otherwise an attractive number can merely move costs outside the meter or compare a weaker model against a stronger one.
Integrate power over a stated system boundary
Power is an instantaneous rate; energy accumulates over time. Device telemetry may measure only an accelerator, while wall measurements include processors, memory, storage, fans, and power conversion. Record which components are included, sampling interval, meter accuracy, and treatment of idle power. Allocating a shared host's energy to one job requires a stated method. A nameplate power limit is not a measurement of average consumption.
If measured energy covers IT equipment only, a datacenter overhead factor can estimate facility electricity. Power usage effectiveness is facility energy divided by IT energy over a defined interval. It should not be applied again to a measurement that already includes facility overhead. For short runs, compilation, data loading, and idle allocation can matter substantially. Count failed experiments and tuning when the claim concerns a research project's total footprint rather than one successful final run.
Convert energy into an emissions estimate carefully
Operational emissions estimates multiply electricity use by an appropriate carbon-intensity factor. State whether the factor is average or marginal, location- and time-specific or coarse, and which gases its carbon-dioxide-equivalent units include. These factors answer different questions and should not be mixed silently. A contractual renewable-energy claim is not automatically evidence that the physical grid electricity used during the run had zero emissions.
Hardware manufacture and disposal also have emissions. Allocating a share of embodied emissions can use an explicit lifetime and reserved-resource share, but these are accounting assumptions with uncertainty. The Software Carbon Intensity specification includes operational and allocated embodied components per functional unit. Keep the raw totals alongside the intensity. A lower per-request estimate can coexist with rising total emissions when request volume grows, so efficiency claims should not be presented as total-impact claims.
Compare completed work and report uncertainty
Choose a functional unit that preserves utility: a training run reaching a fixed quality target, or a completed inference task meeting quality and latency requirements. Tokens alone may reward verbose outputs; accelerator-hours alone ignore power. Report quality, latency, energy, operational emissions assumptions, and embodied allocation separately. This lets readers recompute a comparison with a different electricity factor instead of treating one composite score as immutable.
Potential reductions include better utilization, less redundant computation, model reuse, and scheduling flexible work in lower-intensity periods. They have constraints: moving jobs can add data transfers, delay useful results, or alter capacity needs. Evaluate the complete change instead of assuming that relocation always helps. Give sensitivity ranges for uncertain power, overhead, grid intensity, and hardware lifetime, and distinguish measurement uncertainty from choices about the accounting boundary.
Work it through
Account for one bounded training experiment
A job's measured IT load averages 2.0 kW for 3 hours. Assume facility PUE 1.2, electricity intensity 0.4 kg CO₂e/kWh, and an explicitly allocated 0.5 kg CO₂e of embodied emissions. All values are illustrative.
IT electricity is 2.0 × 3 = 6.0 kWh.
Because the meter excludes facility overhead, estimate facility electricity as 6.0 × 1.2 = 7.2 kWh.
Operational emissions estimate is 7.2 × 0.4 = 2.88 kg CO₂e.
Adding the declared embodied share gives 3.38 kg CO₂e for this run. Keep 6.0 kWh measured and 7.2 kWh estimated visibly distinct.
The bounded estimate is 3.38 kg CO₂e per qualifying run, conditional on the stated overhead, electricity, and embodiment assumptions.
The living notebook
Explore the model
Interactive lab · function
Use area to reason about accumulation
Vary a and x for y=ax², its tangent, and signed area from zero to x. For a≥0 and x≥0, interpret the curve as an illustrative nonnegative rate and its area as accumulated quantity. This lab does not measure electricity, grid intensity, or emissions from a real workload.
- y at chosen x
- 0.608
- Tangent slope · 2ax
- 1.35
- Signed area · ax³/3
- 0.182
This lab uses only y = ax². Playback traces the curve within the fixed integration interval from 0 to x; it does not estimate numerical error or change the chosen point. Parameter changes pause playback and recompute the model at the current elapsed time. Reset restores both parameters and returns time to zero. Playback starts paused. Adjust either parameter, then choose Play or Step.
Look forAn accumulated quantity depends on the full rate over time, not one peak reading.
Pause & reason
Check your understanding
Your turn
Try it yourself
Two matched-quality runs use 10 kWh and 8 kWh. Their respective electricity factors are 0.1 and 0.3 kg CO₂e/kWh. Compare operational emissions, then explain why neither comparison alone measures a complete lifecycle.
Take a moment to make a prediction or work it out on paper. Open a hint when you need one.
Give me a hint
Multiply each run's energy by its own consistent factor; keep energy and emissions distinct.
Compare with the solution
The first estimates 1 kg CO₂e; the second estimates 2.4 kg CO₂e. The second uses 20% less electricity but estimates 140% more operational emissions in these locations and periods. Neither includes hardware manufacture, omitted components, or other lifecycle effects unless those are explicitly added.
Keep the idea
Take it with you
- Measure energy over an explicit component and time boundary.
- Report electricity factors and embodied allocation assumptions transparently.
- Compare equivalent useful work and keep intensity separate from total impact.
Read further
Original sources and deeper explanations to follow at your own pace.
Optional progress, saved in this browser when available. Revisit any lesson at any time.
Lesson not marked complete.