Besides the lead in robotics for China, those Grok emissions charts are the thing that most leap off the page.

"These estimates should be interpreted with caution. In the case of Grok, they rely heavily on inferred inputs drawn from public reporting"

That chart doesn't really pass the sniff test.

▲

HelloMcFly 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The rest of the quote you began continues:

"On the other hand, Perrault noted that 'Epoch AI independently estimates Grok 4’s emissions to be significantly higher at approximately 140,000 tons of CO₂.'"

I realize these are still estimates, but when the other independent analysis nearly doubles the outcome I'm not left feeling optimistic. One could argue some numbers from others are underestimates... which of course just bums me out all the more!

▲

jazzypants 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I don't know if I would want to do too much sniffing around the Methane power they are using over at xAI.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jul/03/elon-musk-xa...

▲

xnx 6 hours ago | parent [-]

That's definitely a very visible use of carbon generating fuel, but I'd choose methane over coal power plants all day.

	▲	jazzypants 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I agree 100% if those are the only two options. I guess my point is that it's fair to assume that Elon's crew is doing the bare minimum in terms of efficiency and pollutant mitigation-- at least when compared to other data centers who do legally compliant business with real power companies.