idk if that's the intended takeaway from those numbers.

According to AllAboutAI analysis, global AI processing generates over 260,930 kilograms of CO₂ monthly from ChatGPT alone, equivalent to 260 transatlantic flights, with 1 billion daily queries consuming 300 MWh of electricity.

according to the faa there are on average 5500 planes in the air every day, and while i couldn't find an exact number there seem to be between 350 and 1 200 transatlantic flights every day, depending on season.

260 tons is still massive, but let's not kid ourselves. it's about equivalent to producing 12 new american-size cars.

Which is why I threw up in my mouth a little when my boss said we all need to be more bullish on AI this morning.

Your article doesn’t even claim that. Do you have any idea just how carbon intensive a flight is?

It's so important to differentiate between commercial LLMs and AI as a general concept.

It also pollutes the mind of ignorant people with misinformation. Not that that is anything new. But I do think objective truth is very important in a democratic society. It reminds me of that video that used to go around that showed Sinclair Broadcasting in like 20 some different 'local' broadcast news all repeating the same words verbatim. It ended with 'This is extremely dangerous to our democracy'. With AI being added to all the search engines, it is really easy to look something and unknowingly get bombarded with false info pulled out of the dregs of internet. 90% of people don't verify the answer to see if it is based in reality.

The emoji usage, heading & bold text pattern makes me certain the article was written using AI.

But remember, one almond uses at least as much water as two requests to ChatGPT (sources: almonds, queries, data centers), so if you're eating almonds at all then you're being inconsistent.

Yeah, AI is shit and a massive waste of energy, but it's NOTHING compared to the energy usage of the airline industry.

Makes me wonder what they are doing to reach these figures.
Because I can run many models at home and it wouldn't require me to be pouring bottles of water on my PC, nor it would show on my electricity bill.

It's using energy, we need more renewables. That's not a problem with AI. Direct your opprobrium where it belongs

What does it mean to consume water? Like it's used to cool something and then put back in a river? Or it evaporates? It's not like it can be used in some irrecoverable way right?

Shame to see this clickbait blog misinfo here, but the anti-ai sloppers wont let that stop them.

I did some research and according to some AI's this is true. According to some other AI's this is false.

Generating bullshit that isn't really that useful.

Remember when the Apple Newton "revolutionized" computing with handwriting recognition?

No, of course not, because the whole thing sucked and vanished outside of old Doonesbury cartoons. LOL

Well what you said is not true, but since you are so interested in this, why limit it to AI? Just quit using computers all together.

Barely ever used it just for that reason and the fact that the algorithms are getting worse by the day. But now my work is forcing us to use it. To increase productivity you see...

A lot of these studies they list are already years outdated and irrelevant. The models are much more efficient now, and it’s mainly the Musk owned AI data centers that are high pollution. Most of the pollution from the majority of data centers is not from AI, but other use.

The old room-sized ENIAC computers used 150-200 kW of power, and couldn’t do even a fraction of what your smart phone can do. The anti-AI people are taking advantage of most people’s ignorance, intentionally using outdated studies, and implying that the power usage will continue to grow- when in fact it has already shrunk dramatically.

I stopped l, not that I used it that much, about 5 months ago.