719

In the late 2000s there was a push by a lot of businesses to not print emails and people use to add a 'Please consider this environment before printing this email.'

Considering how bad LLMs/'ai' are with power consumption and water usage a new useless tag email footer should be made.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] IcedRaktajino@startrek.website 94 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Ooooh, I'm totally adding that to my email signature.

Aaaaaaand done.

[-] scytale@piefed.zip 27 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

If you don't mind the additional real estate, it would also be great to have a version where "printing" is still there but struck out, for people who aren't aware of the original.

[-] IcedRaktajino@startrek.website 38 points 3 weeks ago

Had to shrink the font a bit; looks better all on one line.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone 12 points 3 weeks ago
[-] IcedRaktajino@startrek.website 15 points 3 weeks ago

Is that good? I'm old and have no idea what that means.😆

[-] Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone 9 points 3 weeks ago

Haha it’s good! It’s supposed to be a little guy saluting. The o is the head and the 7 is the arm and hand doing a salute pose.

[-] Cevilia 77 points 3 weeks ago

🏞 Please consider the environment before issuing a return-to-office mandate

This is the right response - RTO is much worse for the climate than GenAI.

[-] Trihilis@ani.social 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

So I'm not saying RTO is worse than AI or vice versa. But do you have any data to back up that statement. I've been seeing nothing but news about AI data centers being an absolute nightmare for the planet. And even more so when corrupt politicians let then be built in places that already have trouble with maintaining normal water levels.

I get both are bad for the environment.

Editie: thanks for all the sources everyone. TIL

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Well, real quick, my drive to the office is ~10 miles. My car gets ~3.1 miles/kwh. So let's say I use 3 KWH per trip, two trips a day, makes it 6KWH. A typical LLM request uses 0.0015KWH of electricity, so my single day commute in my car uses ~4000 LLM queries worth of electricity.

Yeah RTO is way worse, even for an EV that gets 91MPGe.

The thing is: those AI datacenters are used for a lot of things, LLM's usage amount to about 3% of usage, the rest is for stuff like image analysis, facial recognition, market analysis, recommendation services for streaming platforms and so on. And even the water usage is not really the big ticket item:

The issue of placement of data centers is another discussion, and i agree with you that placing data centers in locations that are not able to support them is bullshit. But people seem to simply not realize that everything we do has a cost. The US energy system uses 58 trillion gallons of water in withdrawals each year. ChatGPT use about 360 million liters/year, which comes down to 0.006% of Americas water usage / year. An average american household uses about 160 gallons of water / day; ChatGPT requests use about 20-50 ml/request. If you want to save water, go vegan or fix water pipes.

[-] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Proof was during COVID:

In many megacities of the world, the concentration of PM and NO2 declined by > 60% during the lockdown period. The air quality index (AQI) also improved substantially throughout the world during the lockdown. SOURCE

[-] inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I'm on my phone so I can't fully crunch the numbers, but I took a few minutes to poke around and I think I found the stats to put both of these in perspective.

https://www.arbor.eco/blog/ai-environmental-impact

Each query sends out roughly 4.32 grams of CO₂e (MLCO2), which may seem trivial on its own but adds up millions of queries a day, and you're looking at a staggering daily output. 1 million messages sent to ChatGPT is equivalent to 11,001 miles driven by an average gasoline-powered passenger vehicle

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/greenhouse-gas-emissions-typical-passenger-vehicle

The average passenger vehicle emits about 400 grams of CO2 per mile.

So yikes and without a doubt unsustainable energy usage, but comparing this to wikis article on COVID environmental impacts

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_of_the_COVID-19_pandemic_on_the_environment?wprov=sfla1

In 2020, carbon dioxide emissions fell by 6.4% or 2.3 billion tonnes globally.

My napkin math says that we would need ~532,407,407 AI queries to match the 2020 work for home drop, but unfortunately, Chat GPT alone is estimating 2.5 billion prompts, daily.

I started writing this assuming the opposite was true but unfortunately AI is a bigger environmental impact than an RTO. Which is honestly shocking. I hope someone corrects my math and tells me it isn't this dire. Work from should be the norm, but AI is truly just a massive environmental burden.

[-] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

To put this into perspective: imagine smoking 4.32 grams of weed every day and imagine how that would add up.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] oplkill@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

This! There are no reason go back to office for some professions like programmers, managers, etc

[-] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 3 weeks ago

To be fair they never cared about environment. A paper is something easy to recycle and certainly not the most polluting material to produce.

It was more about saving money, greenwashing and pushing a conversion towards digital archiving (which is much more efficient that paper)

[-] Chozo@fedia.io 17 points 3 weeks ago

Text generation uses hardly any energy at all, though. Most phones do it locally these days. In fact, it likely takes less energy to generate an email in 5 seconds than it would take for you to type it out manually in 5 minutes with the screen on the whole time.

[-] stevedice@sh.itjust.works 14 points 3 weeks ago
[-] cdf12345@lemmy.zip 17 points 3 weeks ago

“If everyone is littering, it’s not a big deal if I throw the occasional can on the ground”

[-] Artisian@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I mean, depends on the email. If you spend more time answering yourself than the AI would, you almost certainly emit more green house gasses, used more fresh water and electricity, and burned more calories. Depending on the email, you might have also decreased net happiness generally.

Do we care about the environment or not? Please, oppose datacenters in desserts and stop farming alfalfa where water supplies are low. But your friend using AI to answer an email that could have been a google search is not the problem.

I miss the days where climate activists didn't get distracted by small change like GenAI. The big ticket issues haven't changed since the beginning of the climate movement: Cars, Flights, Industry (mainly concrete), Meat and Heating/AC are what drives climate change - any movement that polices individual usage of negligible CO2 emission will fail because noone likes to be preached at.

[-] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

For climate sure, though local impact by focusing so much demand in such small geography does create outsized impacts for that local area in terms of local energy and water.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] HubertManne@piefed.social 13 points 3 weeks ago

This is the main reason I am reticent about using ai. I can get around its funtional limitations but I need to know they have brought the energy usage down.

[-] taiyang@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago

It's not that bad when it's just you fucking around having it write fanfics instead of doing something more taxing, like playing an AAA video game or, idk, run a microwave or whatever it is normies do. Training a model is very taxing, but running them isn't and the opportunity cost might even be net positive if you tend to use your gpu a lot.

It becomes more of a problem when everyone is doing it when it's not needed, like reading and writing emails. There's no net positive, it's a very large scale usage, and brains are a hell of a lot more efficient at it. This use case has gotta be one of the dumbest imaginable, all while making people legitimately dumber using it over time.

[-] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 3 weeks ago

oh you are talking locally I think. I play games on my steamdeck as my laptop could not handle it at all.

[-] taiyang@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Yup, and the deck can do stuff at an astounding low wattage, like 3W to 15W range. Meanwhile there's gpus that can run at like 400W-800W, like when people used to use two 1080s SLI. I always found it crazy when I saw a guy running a system burning as much electricity as a weak microwave just to play a game, lol. Kept his house warm, tho.

load more comments (1 replies)

Your steam deck at full power (15W TDP per default) equals 5 ChatGPT requests per hour. Do you feel guilty yet? No? And you shouldn't!

[-] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago

It's the same as playing a 3d game. It's a GPU or GPU equivalent doing the work. It doesn't matter if you are asking it to summarize an email or play Red Dead Redemption.

[-] HubertManne@piefed.social 5 points 3 weeks ago

I mean if every web search I do is like playing a 3d game then I will stick with web searches. 3d gaming is the most energy intensive thing I do on a computer.

[-] slazer2au@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago

You can run one on your PC locally so you know how much power it is consuming

[-] HubertManne@piefed.social 2 points 3 weeks ago

I already stress my laptop with what I do so I doubt I will do that anytime soon. I tend to use pretty old hardware though. 5 year plus. honestly closer to 10.

load more comments (2 replies)

How much further down than 3W/request can you go? i hope you don't let your microwave run 10 seconds longer than optimal, because that's exactly the amount of energy we are talking about. Or running a 5W nightlight for a bit over half an hour.

LLM and Image generation are not what kills the climate. What does are flights, cars, meat, and bad insulation of houses leading to high energy usage in winter. Even if we turned off all GenAI, it wouldn't even leave a dent compared to those behemoths.

load more comments (13 replies)
[-] _AutumnMoon_ 12 points 3 weeks ago

Please consider the environment before sending me an email, seriously, I won't read it.

[-] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 10 points 3 weeks ago

I want to see the "cease and desist you may not use my facebook posts without my express permission" type footers but against AI to start showing up

[-] aarRJaay@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

But it's everywhere now and it's almost impossible to use mainstream services without it being used. I can just go to Google anymore, type a search query and get a reply without AI bs being used. How long before it's baked into the GMail compose window and it doesn't without me wanting to.

[-] IndiBrony@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago

Then we stop using it.

I think we need a Rule 34 of open-source programs:

Rule 34: If it exists, there is an open-source version of it

i) If no open-source version exists, it is currently being created

ii) If no open-source version is being created, you must create it yourself

[-] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Doesn't gmail already do this? I seem to remember there being 'suggested response' options before I turned it off in the settings that were definitely AI generated. That option being presented to me creeps me out because you can't know if what you're receiving was actually written by the person sending it.

[-] a_wild_mimic_appears@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

you need to generate about 2 million emails (using qwen) for the carbon emission of one transatlantic flight, personal use is definitely not the power hungry shit you imagine

[-] npdean@lemmy.today 8 points 3 weeks ago

I am a small part of the problem, so I am not a problem.

[-] a_wild_mimic_appears@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

i don't know what amount of energy and water LLM's or image generation use, but you vastly overestimate it if you react like this.

If you don't have your screen on power save after 15 seconds of non-use, rethink it - 8 minutes of screen time assuming a 30W monitor equals about 1 ChatGPT request, and that's including the training of the model and the production of the hardware it's running on.

If it cost any real amount of money, don't you think that people would have to pay for that? ChatGPT has 400m users, and only 11m actually pay for it.

E: Something else to set into relation: Charging your phone for about 40 minutes using slow charging (5W) is one request. Water use? 10-25ml water per request - a 500ml bottle lasts you 20-50 questions.

Gaming? ChatGPT uses the energy of 20000 households (not bad for serving 400m users and around 1b requests/day). Fortnite alone uses more than 400000 households, and noone preaches into my ear to stop playing fortnite because it's bad for the climate. (and i don't play fortnite lol)

I never had a car, i have flown 4 times in my life, i rarely eat meat. I can generate 10000 requests per day if i cared to and wouldn't have a chance reaching even the basic wastefulness that a american household is.

[-] _AutumnMoon_ 3 points 3 weeks ago

an AI center in Texas was using 460 Million gallons of water, so much that residents were told to cut back on showering to accommodate it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

I think they're pointing out the 180-turn in so-called "priorities." Companies once claimed to want something done for the "sake of the environment," but now they have no problem using resource-intensive AI without any acknowledgement of how bad it is for the environment.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2025
719 points (100.0% liked)

Showerthoughts

36940 readers
522 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS