A reckoning for the environmental footprint of your AI usage.

Your organization is going to keep using AI, and it also wants to take AI's environmental cost seriously. Until now the choices were to ignore that cost or to overclaim about addressing it. R3CKON is the third option: an honest estimate of your usage-phase footprint with stated error bars, verified environmental certificates retired in response every month, and a record that says exactly what you can claim.

View the console See how it works

Footprint figures are modeled estimates with stated 90 percent ranges, not measurements. Claims are activity claims: certificates record the restoration, reduction, and renewable generation you funded, identified by project and vintage. They never assert a neutrality status, and the certificate says exactly what statements it supports.

Metering to retirement, end to end

Meter

We count your AI usage from metadata alone: which models, how many tokens, which regions. Your prompts and outputs never reach us; anything content-shaped is rejected at the API boundary.

Estimate

No one outside the providers can know AI's environmental cost exactly, so we estimate it honestly: a public, versioned methodology turns your usage into water, carbon, and energy figures, each shown with its full range of uncertainty.

Retire

Every month, real money goes to work against the conservative end of that estimate (P90): verified certificates for water restoration, carbon reduction, and renewable energy are retired on your behalf, whole units only.

Certify

You receive a certificate naming exactly what was funded and retired (projects, vintages, supplier references), the estimate that sized it, and the precise statements you can publish on the strength of it.

The estimate and the retirement are separate assertions. Retirements are exact: registry-denominated instruments, retired on your behalf, documented with supplier references. Estimates are modeled, and their uncertainty is quantified and shown. The certificate keeps the two apart so the record your auditors see is the strong one.

The whole product in one picture

On the left, our best estimate of what your AI usage consumed, stated with its uncertainty because no one can know it exactly. On the right, the verified projects your subscription funded in response. Two columns, related but never equated, and never blended into one score.

LEFT SIDE OF THE LEDGER

Your usage, estimated

Providers do not disclose enough for anyone to know this exactly. This column is our best estimate of it, built from your token counts, with the error bars kept visible.

Fresh input tokensfull input coefficient

Cached input tokens≈10% of the compute; discounted in the estimate and toward your cap

Output tokensthe expensive direction (decode)

Reasoning tokenscounted as output; if a provider hides them, a conservative multiplier applies

feeds one estimate

Usage-phase footprint estimate

solid to P50 · lighter to P90, the accrual basis · whiskers span the 90% range

A ledger, not an equation. The right side responds to the left. It never equals it, and no claim we support says it does.

RIGHT SIDE OF THE LEDGER

Credits retired in response

Real money into verified projects that restore water, reduce carbon, and add renewable generation. The work happens where those projects are, which may be far from your compute, and the certificate says where.

WaterWRCs · 1,000 gallons each

Carboncredits · 1 tCO2e each

EnergyRECs · 1 MWh each

Whole registry instruments, identified by project and vintage on every certificate. Categories never mix: no combined score, no cross-category totals, and RECs are never presented as carbon credits.

Read it the way an auditor would. The left side is a modeled estimate with a stated range; the right side is exact instruments retired against that estimate's conservative end (P90). Restoring water in one watershed does not un-consume water in another, and a retired credit does not make a footprint disappear. What the ledger records, and what you may say, is the activity: estimated impact on one side, verified response on the other.

Metadata only, always. The platform ingests token counts, model names, and regions. It never proxies your AI traffic and never receives prompt or completion content; content-shaped payloads are rejected at the API boundary and enforced by tests.

What you get, and what we refuse to sell

What you get

·An honest monthly estimate of your AI usage's water, carbon, and energy cost, with the uncertainty stated instead of hidden.
·Real spending: at least half of every subscription buys verified certificates, retired on your behalf each month.
·A certificate naming projects and vintages, plus the exact statements you can publish and stand behind under scrutiny.
·A price that reads as a small line item next to your AI bill, not a second one.

What this is not, on purpose

·Not a neutrality badge. The footprint is an estimate with a wide stated range; declaring it settled would be fiction. The record shows activity instead: estimated cost on one side, funded response on the other.
·Not a measurement. Providers do not disclose per-token energy or water. Anyone selling precise figures is guessing without error bars; we estimate conservatively, in the open.
·Not always local. Verified projects live where they live: restoring one watershed does not un-consume water in another, so certificates state the geography rather than implying it away.

Next: how every number on this page is produced

Read the methodology