this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2025
652 points (99.4% liked)
Technology
75963 readers
3631 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It doesn't make any difference whether they use coal, nuclear, or renewables.
If they were using renewables the rest of us would need the coal generated power to keep the lights on.
There's one exception - when they are self-sufficient, or even net positive, with renewables.
One example is the Google datacenter in Hamina, Finland. They build it in an old unused paper mill, built their own renewables (3/4ths of their required at this point), and they use the cooling loop for district heating for the city. That extra heat provides around 75% of the required heating, meaning the city could stop relying on their old natural gas heaters so now the district heating runs on renewables as well.
It's easy to be an energy neutral datacenter, simply pour enough money to building new renewables that wouldn't have been built without your contributions, and you don't tax the power grid.
I'll begrudgingly concede that this is a good point.
Part of me wants to say "just force these assholes to build renewables without the datacentres" but I know that's nonsensical.
I guess this is how carbon credit schemes are intended to work, but I'm aware that aside from a few specific cases carbon trading has just been a way to obfuscate carbon emissions.
And the nuclear ?
You skipped it somehow.
you seem to have missed my point.
If humanity's energy requirements without AI are x, and AI's requirements are an additional y, then AI is reponsible for the worst energy sources up to the value of y.
I'm just pointing out the fact that you mention nuclear energy and then discarded it in your follow up.
What ?
I didn't "discard" it, it's just not a pertinent inclusion. I also didn't mention geothermal power, or wheelbarrows.
It doesn't matter what type of power is plugged into data centres. Turning them off would reduce coal power consumption.
I live in a country that produces 70+% of its energy through nuclear reactors.
Sure we are definitely an exception but turning off datacenters where I live wouldn't change anything about coal.
To be clear I'm not advocating for nuclear energy nor am I saying it's a bad option.
Every country has a different energy mix, some more "carbon efficient" than others let's say but it is not only revolving about coal and renewables.
Anyway, I think it's fairly clear to me the datacenters won't shutdown anytime soon even without AI it's gonna be a major consumption of energy in any country. So I think nuclear should definitely at least considered as an option and to some extent be part of any energy mix. I think everyone knows that only renewables is not really a realistic scenario. Coal obviously is the worst option in any amount. So yeah, I was surprised that you didn't mention it that's it. I do think it's very much relevant to the topic of the ever increasing energy consumption we are all gonna face in the future. This post would probably not even exist if we shutdown datacenters but I suppose you meant it as shutting down only processing power toward AI. But still we will need more datacenters in the future no matter what.
Dude. You seem incapable of understanding the point I was trying to make.
Exactly, people don't seem to realise that higher demand for energy means higher demand for all sources of energy including fussil fuels.
If doesn't matter if this datacenter runs 100% on renewables if that means that the overall demand on the powergrid increases and now other clients that used to get (a higher percentage of) their power from renewable are getting it from coal, it's just a green washing shift blame technique.