TruthOrFake Logo
TruthOrFake
Fact Check: xAI's turbines could emit over 2,000 tons of NOx annually.

Fact Check: xAI's turbines could emit over 2,000 tons of NOx annually.

Published June 20, 2025
ByFactChecker 1.1 avatarFactChecker 1.1
i
VERDICT
Needs Research

# Fact Check: "xAI's turbines could emit over 2,000 tons of NOx annually." ## What We Know Elon Musk's artificial intelligence startup, xAI, has been...

Fact Check: "xAI's turbines could emit over 2,000 tons of NOx annually."

What We Know

Elon Musk's artificial intelligence startup, xAI, has been accused of operating gas turbines that emit significant amounts of nitrogen oxides (NOx). According to a letter from the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), xAI has installed 35 gas turbines at its data center in Memphis, Tennessee, despite only applying for permits for 15 turbines temporarily (source-2). The SELC claims that the manufacturer-supplied emissions data indicates that these turbines could emit between 1,200 and 2,000 tons of NOx annually, potentially making xAI the largest industrial emitter of NOx in Memphis (source-2).

Additionally, a report from CNN corroborates this claim, stating that the turbines can produce up to 2,000 tons of nitrogen oxide pollution each year (source-4). This emission level raises concerns about air quality and public health, as exposure to high levels of NOx is linked to respiratory diseases and other health issues (source-2).

Analysis

The claim that xAI's turbines could emit over 2,000 tons of NOx annually is supported by multiple credible sources. The SELC's letter to the Shelby County Health Department provides a direct assertion based on aerial imagery and emissions data, which indicates that the turbines are operating without the necessary permits and may be violating the Clean Air Act (source-2). This advocacy group's reputation for environmental protection lends weight to their claims, although it is essential to consider their potential bias as an environmental organization.

Furthermore, the information from CNN aligns with the SELC's findings, reinforcing the assertion regarding the emissions levels of xAI's turbines (source-4). However, it is crucial to note that while the upper limit of 2,000 tons is mentioned, the lower estimate is 1,200 tons, which complicates the claim slightly. This range suggests that while the claim is plausible, it is not definitively established that emissions will reach the upper threshold.

The reliability of these sources is generally high, given that they are established news outlets and environmental advocacy organizations. However, the claims should be interpreted with caution until further independent verification of the emissions data can be conducted.

Conclusion

Needs Research. While there is substantial evidence to support the claim that xAI's turbines could emit significant amounts of NOx annually, the exact figures remain somewhat ambiguous, with a range provided rather than a definitive number. Further investigation into the emissions data and independent assessments of xAI's operations are necessary to confirm the accuracy of the claims made by the SELC and reported by news outlets.

Sources

  1. What is Explainable AI (XAI)? | IBM
  2. Elon Musk's xAI accused polluting air in Memphis, SELC ...
  3. 如何看待机器（深度）学习可解释方法（XAI）的现状 ...
  4. Elon Musk is building 'the world's biggest supercomputer. ...
  5. 설명 가능한 AI(XAI)란 무엇인가요? - IBM
  6. Musk's xAI data centre allegedly running illegal gas turbines
  7. 説明可能なAI（XAI）とは？| IBM
  8. 'How come I can't breathe?': Musk's data company draws a ...

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
✓100% Free
✓No Registration
✓Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: At least 26 turbines remain operational at xAI's site.
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: At least 26 turbines remain operational at xAI's site.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: At least 26 turbines remain operational at xAI's site.

Jun 20, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: SELC alleges xAI operated turbines without proper pollution controls.
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: SELC alleges xAI operated turbines without proper pollution controls.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: SELC alleges xAI operated turbines without proper pollution controls.

Jun 20, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: xAI faces lawsuit for operating 35 turbines without permits.
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: xAI faces lawsuit for operating 35 turbines without permits.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: xAI faces lawsuit for operating 35 turbines without permits.

Jun 20, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: China installed more wind turbines and solar panels than the rest of the world combined.
Needs Research

Fact Check: China installed more wind turbines and solar panels than the rest of the world combined.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: China installed more wind turbines and solar panels than the rest of the world combined.

Jun 30, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: PFAS manufacturers 3M and DuPont agreed to pay at least $12.5 billion 💰for their roles in contaminating state landfills and rivers with “forever chemicals.” For over 50 years, they knew that PFAS exposure could be linked to kidney and testicular cancer, but chose to keep the risk hidden from the public. Those affected may be eligible for compensation. Check eligibility for a settlement today with our 1-minute evaluation. ⚡️
Partially True

Fact Check: PFAS manufacturers 3M and DuPont agreed to pay at least $12.5 billion 💰for their roles in contaminating state landfills and rivers with “forever chemicals.” For over 50 years, they knew that PFAS exposure could be linked to kidney and testicular cancer, but chose to keep the risk hidden from the public. Those affected may be eligible for compensation. Check eligibility for a settlement today with our 1-minute evaluation. ⚡️

Detailed fact-check analysis of: PFAS manufacturers 3M and DuPont agreed to pay at least $12.5 billion 💰for their roles in contaminating state landfills and rivers with “forever chemicals.” For over 50 years, they knew that PFAS exposure could be linked to kidney and testicular cancer, but chose to keep the risk hidden from the public. Those affected may be eligible for compensation. Check eligibility for a settlement today with our 1-minute evaluation. ⚡️

Jul 30, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that
False

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
Explore All Fact Checks
Fact Check: xAI's turbines could emit over 2,000 tons of NOx annually. | TruthOrFake Blog