← Back to Blogs
Insights/Blogs
Information TechnologyAugust 20265-6 min

ESG in the Global IT Sector

What Investors and Clients Are Now Asking?

ESG in the Global IT Sector

Reading Time

5 min

Article Sections

5

Share Links

3

01

Article Section

A Sector Running in Two Directions at Once

Part 01

IT's environmental footprint has always run in two directions at once. Migrating workloads to hyperscale cloud can cut associated emissions by up to 96%, and IT platforms underpin emissions tracking and energy efficiency gains across every other sector. At the same time, the compute required to deliver that value is accelerating: data centre electricity use rose 12% a year through 2024, and AI reasoning models can require up to 100 times more energy per query than simpler ones.

Manufacturing compounds the picture on the hardware side. Producing a server accounts for 75-80% of its lifetime emissions, far more than running it, and global e-waste reached 62 million tonnes in 2022, of which only 22.3% is formally recycled. Regulation has caught up with all of this simultaneously: the EU CSRD, India's BRSR Core, and the US SEC's climate rule are each moving IT companies from narrative disclosure toward audited, quantitative reporting, while the EU AI Act adds board-level obligations for AI risk governance on top of environmental ones. The compliance burden and the emissions problem are converging on the same set of companies at the same time.

02

Article Section

The Scope That Actually Determines Credibility

Part 02

The scope that actually matters

Value-chain emissions represent over 90% of total footprint for leading IT firms: 93.2% at TCS, 97.3% at Microsoft, 76% at Apple. Operational reductions, the efficiency wins companies lead with in sustainability reports, address a fraction of this. Just 40% of IT firms with science-based targets have validated Scope 3 goals, and 92% of Fortune 500 tech firms carry net-zero pledges while only 22% disclose a detailed roadmap to reach them. This is not a measurement gap. It is a strategy gap: companies have built infrastructure to report the part of their footprint they control directly, and have not yet built equivalent infrastructure for the part they do not.

Five companies, five different bets

There is no single ESG leadership template in IT, and the divergence is instructive. Infosys and TCS lead on operational renewables, at 77.7% and 74% of electricity respectively, and Infosys has achieved a 38.3% absolute Scope 3 reduction since 2020. Microsoft and Google have already matched 100% of their electricity use with renewables and are now competing on a harder problem, firm, round-the-clock clean power: Microsoft's 835 MW nuclear power purchase agreement to restart Three Mile Island Unit 1 is the largest corporate nuclear deal on record, while Google is pursuing 24/7 carbon-free matching on every grid it operates in by 2030. Apple's exposure runs differently again, with 76% of its lifecycle emissions coming from the use phase of sold products, making its strategy a function of green bonds and low-carbon manufacturing rather than data centre operations at all.

AI is rewriting the baseline before the reporting catches up

Inference now accounts for 80-90% of AI's lifecycle energy use, and a single generative AI query uses roughly ten times the energy of a conventional search. This is why Microsoft's Scope 3 emissions rose 26% over five years even as its Scope 1 and 2 emissions approached zero: efficiency gains at the facility level are being outpaced by growth in what the facility is being asked to do. Hardware and software optimisation are helping, Google's Gemini inference energy dropped 33-fold in one year, and newer accelerator chips are up to 30 times more efficient than earlier generations, but efficiency per query is a different variable from total energy consumed, and the second one is what regulators and investors will eventually price.

03

Article Section

What IT Leaders Should Do Now?

Part 03

Build Scope 3 measurement before it is mandated

With CSRD, BRSR, and SEC rules converging on audited data, IT firms should treat comprehensive Scope 3 measurement, not just target-setting, as the near-term priority, since only 40% of firms with science-based targets currently have it validated.

Separate efficiency metrics from consumption metrics in disclosure

Reporting inference energy per query without reporting total inference volume understates the real trajectory. Leaders should disclose both, since the gap between the two is exactly what Microsoft's rising Scope 3 despite falling per-unit energy demonstrates.

Match the decarbonisation strategy to the actual emissions profile

A hardware company whose footprint sits in product use, a hyperscaler whose footprint sits in data centre operations, and a services firm whose footprint sits in the supply chain need different playbooks entirely. Copying a competitor's strategy without first mapping where the emissions actually originate wastes capital.

04

Article Section

Conclusion

Part 04

IT's decarbonisation paradox will not resolve through better efficiency alone. The sector has spent a decade optimising the roughly 10% of emissions it controls directly, while the 90% that sits in its value chain, and increasingly in the energy AI consumes at scale, has outpaced every operational gain made against it.

The companies that separate genuine progress from efficient-looking operations will be the ones still standing when audited Scope 3 data becomes as routine as a financial filing.

05

Article Section

Frequently Asked Questions

Part 05

Why is the IT sector considered both a climate solution and a growing emissions source?

IT platforms cut emissions elsewhere, cloud migration alone can lower enterprise IT emissions by up to 96%, but AI-driven data centre electricity demand is rising four times faster than the broader grid.

How significant are Scope 3 emissions for major IT companies?

They dominate: value-chain emissions exceed 90% of total footprint at firms including TCS, Microsoft, and Apple, far outweighing direct operational emissions.

Why did Microsoft's emissions rise even as it approached zero in direct operations?

Its Scope 3 emissions grew 26% over five years due to rapid AI-driven data centre expansion, even as Scope 1 and 2 emissions reached near-zero through renewable procurement.

Is there one dominant ESG strategy among leading tech companies?

No: Infosys and TCS lead on renewable electricity share, Microsoft and Google are pursuing firm 24/7 clean power including nuclear, and Apple's strategy centres on product use-phase emissions and green bonds.

What should IT companies prioritise to close the disclosure credibility gap?

Comprehensive, validated Scope 3 measurement, since only 40% of firms with science-based targets currently have validated value-chain goals despite 92% holding net-zero pledges.

Keep Reading

Related Blogs

Next Step

Ready to turn ESG complexity into strategic advantage?

Talk to ESG Astraa about disclosures, climate strategy, governance controls, and execution support for your team.

We use cookies to run this site and, with your consent, to understand how it is used. See our Cookie Policy for details.