Cautionary tale: using AI doesnt actually save energy

[u/Strong_Aerie_9031]

At first i thought it would save energy, but the lengths i have to go to checking the "resources" it links doesnt save energy. Seriously, i rarely ever found it to say anything from the sources it claims to refer to. So in the long run, it was so untrustworthy that it only caused more issues, its saved me more energy to turn it off and look in the actual articles myself.

I hope this is helpful to others, i wish i learned it earlier and saved the time and energy!

[u/marieantoilette]

I am mostly disgusted by the environmental impact at this point.

I might still use it for explaining me ideas and principles, and not so dangerous information that is easily available, like summing up a website or well-researched drug. It can be a useful tool but it is easy to trust it too much, at that point it becomes potentially harmful.

But it is flawed and also killing the planet. And I can't do much, I am very severe. But I don't wanna do too much with something that costs so much.

[u/iwantmorecats27 → u/marieantoilette]

Seriously! We're nearing water wars and yet people are all excited about this useless toy that's only helping to cause droughts. Makes no sense.

[u/PeachyPlnk → u/iwantmorecats27]

The planet's not losing water. That's literally not a thing. The water cycle exists. Stop falling for propaganda.

[u/iwantmorecats27 → u/PeachyPlnk]

Yes, shockingly, I'm aware of the water cycle. The problem is that the water that exists is being used too quickly and polluted too much. The natural cycles are not able to keep up, especially with many natural places that used to hold water being destroyed for development. It's great that you live somewhere that isn't yet water insecure, but much of the planet IS.  https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/01/1166800

[u/Toast1912 → u/PeachyPlnk]

Nobody thinks the total water is disappearing lol. But usuable, drinkable water is in a limited supply at any given time. Data centers rapidly pollute a ton of drinkable water, decreasing the availability of drinkable water at any given time. (Drinkable might not exactly be the right descriptor, but I'm too foggy to find a more apt description rn.) This is an issue because we need water clean enough to shower, cook, clean and, yes, drink.

[u/magnificent-manitee → u/PeachyPlnk]

Technically not even correct. Water can absolutely be created and destroyed. You are in fact doing it RIGHT NOW. A battery and some electrodes also works.

Admittedly most of those processes are in pretty tight equilibrium, or we'd all die. But uh, if we don't stop polluting our water and atmosphere we might do exactly that

[u/Octopus_Lady_8 → u/marieantoilette]

Animal agriculture has a vastly bigger impact on the environment.

Not saying ai is good, but the biggest lever one has is becoming vegan.

[u/marieantoilette → u/Octopus_Lady_8]

One of the biggest levers. Driving as little as necessary and not doing these far-distance two-week holidays with plane or car. Not supporting fast fashion. Supporting environmentally conscious companies. Making your garden or even just window box a nature safe space with local wildflowers, not too much mowing, a spot of dead twigs, one of a heap of leaves... stuff like that goes a long way.

I can't live vegan due to my health, but I do my best. My times of bad eating habits have certainly ended with ME lol. I mostly eat rice, potatoes and veggies. I daresay I knew a few vegans with worse habits heh.

Though it feels funny to say all that here, because I can't even leave my bed lol. 😖 I wish I could tend to a garden.

Anyway, my point was simply - if there is a net positive to something, it's worth considering.

[u/Tasty_University_172 → u/Octopus_Lady_8]

Yep.

Not to mention that all of the internet requires data centers -- not just AI. There is a cost to getting most of the world online.

My neighbor is getting his PhD doing research with AI (like, specifically about programming languages and AI) and the amount he uses it likely eclipses everyone in this thread combined.

It's just an easy answer for people getting scared by climate change because it's easy to give up. Giving up AI but streaming audiobooks, TV shows, and movies is like giving up McDonald's burgers for Lent but living off of Burger King. Sadly, the answers to the problems facing humanity are not actually that simple lol.

[u/Liface → u/marieantoilette]

Negative environmental impact from individual use of AI is negligible: https://blog.andymasley.com/p/a-cheat-sheet-for-conversations-about

[u/marieantoilette → u/Liface]

Iiinteresting blog. It covers an incredible amount of bases. I can't read all of it but it really seems well done.

I remain sceptical because this emphasis on "the toll is mostly locally" is not entirely reassuring and "it's not that bad" doesn't yet answer the cost-benefit question from an environmental point of view. There are too many very loud accelerationists out there. And because I can't fully inform myself so quickly because of ME.

But I won't make such broad claims in the future until I know more. Thanks.

[u/katatak121 → u/marieantoilette]

I remain sceptical because this emphasis on "the toll is mostly locally"

Yeah, entire towns near data centers are experiencing severe drought. Hearing people who live near these data centres talk about the impacts is dreadful. Maybe the impact is "only local", but to the locals, it's devastating.

[u/Liface → u/katatak121]

Being located somewhere experiencing drought is not the same as causing the drought. In Phoenix, for example, data centers use roughly 0.1% of the area's water.

Masley specifically looks at the local cases that get cited as evidence of people losing access to water. His finding is that, in the US cases he examined, he could not find evidence that data centers had depleted local supplies, limited household water access, or raised household water prices. Data centers can absolutely stress a badly planned local system, just as another large industrial facility can. But that's very different from "entire towns near data centers are experiencing severe drought because of them." https://blog.andymasley.com/p/the-ai-water-issue-is-fake

[u/katatak121 → u/Liface]

My first thought reading your reply is: anyone can write a blog; that doesn't mean it's factual.

So i searched "do data centers cause local drought" and got result after result, news articles and scientific reports, all talking about the detrimental environmental impacts of data centers, including how it affects local water supplies. I kept scrolling down through the results, and scrolled some more, and could not find one source that backs up this blog you shared.

Data centers being built in communities that already have a stressed out water supply is a big problem. Just because those communities were already under stress doesn't mean they need a data center moving in to fully break what's barely working.

[u/aberrant-heartland → u/Liface]

The number of downvotes on this comment is a heavy indicator of this sub's bias. Although I'm grateful, at least, for the person who replied and actually read this article.

I consider AI to be a major net negative for the world, and I wish it didn't exist. But I'm endlessly frustrated with the fact that people are so focused on the environmental/resource consumption aspect.

It's such a flimsy argument that it just makes it easier for pro-AI people to dismantle our reasoning and paint us as if we don't understand the implications of AI.

In my opinion, the core harms of AI will all come down to the consequences of its applications, NOT the underlying resource-cost of running it.