Is AI sustainable?

A line often quoted is that an AI prompt uses a bottle of water. This stems from a 2023 paper that estimated training GPT3 in Microsoft US data centres could evaporate 700,000 litres of freshwater. The same paper projected global AI-related water withdrawal could reach approximately 4.2–6.6 billion cubic metres by 2027.

In 2025 Google reported that its median Gemini text prompt model used approximately 0.24 Wh electricity, 0.03 g CO₂e and 0.26 mL direct cooling water. A later independent academic analysis expanded Google's accounting boundary to include estimated water consumed in electricity generation, raising the estimate from 0.26 mL to approximately 0.725 mL per median prompt.

Google compares the electricity used by its median prompt, 0.24 Wh, to less than nine seconds of television.

So, there is your bottle of water. But, is it the same bottle of water we started with?

How thirsty is AI? It depends on what, and how, you measure.

Can you avoid AI?

No, and yes-ish.
You can absolutely choose not to use generative-AI tools, but AI is increasingly embedded in other digital services.
For example in banking, email, games, phones, computers, security and many of the other digital services we use.

What does this have to do with streetwear?

It’s a question of sustainability. And reporting. AI is now firmly embedded across industries; fashion is no exception. From fake prom dresses to game-changing 3D design software, to the changing way we shop.

Sustainability, transparency and reporting are currently changing across the fashion industry. The EU, UK and other jurisdictions are developing and introducing measures aimed at greater environmental and supply-chain transparency.

Sustainability has been at the core of everything I have built from the start. There are gaps in our current AI environmental impact measuring, reporting and transparency. Until those are ironed out, we don’t have a clear picture.

While this isn't currently a requirement, and may never be, our global sustainable journey is trying to start, albeit through smoke and fire. Understanding the impact of what we do is as big a part of that as anything.

Is using AI sustainable or environmentally harmful?

If electricity per prompt is the metric we're using, Google's comparison puts it at less than nine seconds of TV. But electricity isn't the only metric.
Using AI can look about as environmentally dramatic as watching a few seconds of TV. Change the metric, and the picture changes.

AI is not going away

I hope we see none of the adverse AI futures we have been warned about. I fear we’ll see at least some of them. I'm not convinced that everyone in power has a vested interest in outcomes beyond their own. I'm not an optimist.

I, perhaps foolishly, hope that AI can help fix some of our biggest problems.

Until then, we need better data than water bottles and seconds of TV.

Sources

Li et al. (2023). “Making AI Less ‘Thirsty’: Uncovering and Addressing the Secret Water Footprint of AI Models”

Google (2025). “Measuring the environmental impact of AI inference”

“The Hidden Thirst of AI: A Framework for Estimating Direct, Indirect, and Scarcity-Adjusted Freshwater Consumption per LLM Query” (2026)

The Ecodesign Regulation

The Ecodesign Regulation is an EU framework designed to improve the sustainability and circularity of products throughout their lifecycle.

This week marked an important milestone. The Digital Product Passport infrastructure went live, with textiles identified as one of the EU's priority sectors.

Fashion is no longer later. It’s happening.  

We built for this

It’s always been a priority for me to build something that was sustainable.

Our fabrics are made from 100% GOTS certified organic cotton. Our factories are powered by renewable energy.

Our dyeing process alone, is worth reading about, all garments are dyed in a closed loop system where water comes out clean enough to drink.

Using low-waste digital printing technology and water-based inks that conform to GOTS and Soil Association organic criteria is crucial to circularity. Our inks contain no animal-derived products and are not tested on animals.

And we print on demand, reducing overproduction.

Organic cotton garments awaiting production. Building sustainability begins long before the first print is applied.

Why DPP?

Looking at textiles, most people don't know much beyond what's printed on the care label.

There is no dye information, which is traditionally toxic and uses and wastes a lot of water.  
No manufacturing information, where was it made, does the product contain restricted chemicals?

Yes, these can be found in clothing.

There is no recycling or repair information.
And nothing about how much carbon was produced when making it.

Up till now all that has been required are garment care labels. Wash cold, no tumble dry, fire warnings.

It’s the beginning of the end for greenwashing. “Made sustainably” is no longer going to cut it.

People, Product, Profit

This is how it should be.

We’re nowhere near, sadly. But these regulations walk us toward a circular future where ending fashion waste is an outcome.

It’s not just textiles, steel, batteries and iron are in the priority groups. If you’ve been reading this blog from the start, you’ll know Ive been bitching about low quality products built to last a year for as long as I’ve been building.


We are a long way from the kind of future I would love to see, where every product has been designed for its entire life cycle. This is where it starts.

What happens next?

Testing.
Phased rollout.

At the time of writing, the DPP regulations have only impacted very large producers.

Large producers are now prohibited from destroying their unsold textiles and footwear.  

Early days

As with all new regulations, there will probably be challenges along the way.

Like what to do with the 30% of clothing that doesn’t get sold.

You can see the changes already, a large fashion retailer here in the UK has been advertising the same green dress for the past two months. Now it’s all about re-wear, reuse, recycle.

When I started Mongrel Logic, I wasn't trying to follow regulation. I was trying to build a better way of making products. Seeing circularity become part of legislation feels like confirmation that the industry is finally moving in the right direction.

We're still at the beginning. But for the first time in a long time, it feels like fashion is being asked to think beyond the point of sale.

The Problem With Circularity

We produce 92 million tonnes of textile waste globally per year, with projections rising further by 2030.
Circular fashion has a long way to go.

Voluntary schemes like Remill, has recovered over 100 tons of clothing in the first two years of opening the scheme to all brands.

This is why we don’t have a branded logo tag. So that you can recycle your tee or hoodie.

This is what recycled fashion looks like. Recovered, prepared for remanufacturing.

Asking people to change behaviour

I don’t think this is impossible, we do it all the time. Asking businesses to change, that’s another thing altogether.

Some fast-fashion retailers (you know who) add thousands of new products every day.

Which has been designed for speed, scale and profit rather than longevity, repairability or what happens once it's out in the world.

With fast fashion being increasingly the affordable choice, this is only going to get worse.

Poverty and Sustainability are linked

This is a tough one.

People living with fewer resources are often forced into behaviours that look sustainable from the outside. Having fewer options available isn’t the same thing as sustainability.

Being able to make ‘conscious choices’ is a privilege.

It shouldn’t have to be.

Does building circularity into a streetwear ARG help?

I don’t know yet. Is it going to help solve the worlds problems, probably not.
I’m bothered when business push recycling issues downstream, but in this case, downstream is where the t-shirt is.

People do need to be more invested in what they buy, how often they buy, which brands they support.

I don't know how you resolve these two conflicts.

Will change be regulated?

Many countries are developing textile waste regulations, but much of the sector still relies on voluntary participation.

Regulations are coming, but slowly.

How can a game fix this?

Well, that remains to be seen.
But if we are going to ask people to participate, then surely, we need to build something better. Not more expensive. Just with more meaning.

Not saying I’ve solved that.

Cash for recycled bottles (and t-shirts😉) aside.

Which I’m down for. But, we need so much more. Nobody has solved this yet.

I’m trying.