this post was submitted on 25 May 2025
608 points (84.1% liked)
Memes
50768 readers
786 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
How energy intensive?
Like, compared to random cat videos on youtube n all?
And would the addition of renewable energy be able to handle it?
Using it, not all that energy intensive (one llm use is roughly the same as 3 pre-ai-bullshit google searches iirc). Training it, very energy intensive.
Yes it would but we haven't even replaced all our previous needs with renewables so it aint helping.
According to this article, this is not considered true anymore:
I think there's a reason why OpenAI, Microsoft, Google and Facebook hold the energy consumption and water usage numbers so close to their chest.
Oh damn. Very good article btw.
According to numbers floating around online, thiat would mean one llama query is around as expensive as 10 google searches. And it's likely that those costs will increase further.
It still seems like the biggest factor here is the scale of adaptation. Unfortunately the total energy costs of AI might even scale exponentially since the more complex the queries get, the better the responses will likely be. And that will further drive adaptation.
This pace is so clearly unsustainable it's horrifying, and while it was obvious to some degree, it seems it's worse than I thought.
This article is dubious. When it comes to training it uses a lot of sensationalist and unsupported estimates. Notice the following quote:
I am DEEPLY sceptical of those figures. Like, what data center uses FIVE BLOODY GIGAWATTS. DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH FIVE GIGAWATTS IS. DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH THAT'D COST.
The use of metaphor is also concerning, comparing it to San Francisco or New Hampshire or household electricity consumption.
America produced 4,000TWH of electricity a year. This report says "22% of household consumption in 2028", which if I commit the faux pass of mixing data it gets me 7% of US power consumption. A lot, but not apocalyptic and merely a projection for future power consumption. It's also less than the 50GW to 10 data centers alone in the line I quoted above.
It’s right in that the core problem is that we don’t know and so I can’t fault it for assuming the worst, but even then there are limits.
As for the usage, the document you linked puts generating an image using stable diffusion at 400W seconds, or as much as my computer consumes at idle for 8 seconds. I'm gonna stop reading this article because I'm tired and this isn't worth it.
I'm not pro-AI. I don't like how it makes it so easy to fill the internet with slop. I don't like how it discourages the people who use it from any and all critical thought. I've used AI twice, to reword by assignment questions in college because no amount of googling made the phrasing make sense. All I want is for the fearmongering about AI power consumption to stop, not just because it's inaccurate, but also because it encourages investment into gas-fired power generation to "prepare for the AI boom".
7% is a fucking lot though?? That's an immense amount of power going towards slop instead of making our lives better or growing the economy or actually being productive.
It's like we just decided to start burning our limited reserves of natural gas for fun.
Yes, it is a lot. But again not apocalyptic. And it's noteworthy how the article tries to frame it hyperbolically as "22% of US household consumption".
The situation is already apocalyptic. Making it even worse just means we all die even faster.
We are not currently on track for the world to end. Things are bad, but not that bad.
The world won't end, but we are absolutely on track for billions to die. If not from cataclysmic climate change, then from the inevitable start of WW3 triggered by climate change.
Things are, in fact, really fucking bad. We don't need even more bullshit making it even worse.