cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/20289663

A report from Morgan Stanley suggests the datacenter industry is on track to emit 2.5 billion tons by 2030, which is three times higher than the predictions if generative AI had not come into play.

The extra demand from GenAI will reportedly lead to a rise in emissions from 200 million tons this year to 600 million tons by 2030, thanks largely to the construction of more data centers to keep up with the demand for cloud services.

  • @[email protected]
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    310 months ago

    There exists an alternative that uses a lot less power. And also that power is going to get spent no matter what anyway.

    • Kairos
      link
      fedilink
      English
      110 months ago

      and also that power is going to get spent no matter what anyway

      Yeah but it leads to higher bills for consumers, and generators can get spun down, and it’s keeping fossil fuel plants open, etc.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2110 months ago

    Look, i’m not saying that this isn’t a problem. My only question is, is this one of those “global warming is because people don’t recycle their soda bottles” things? In other words, How concerned should I be about this vs, taking attention away from the energy, beef, and transportation industry?

      • Todd Bonzalez
        link
        fedilink
        English
        910 months ago

        So you’re saying that we should be concerned with datacenters more than things like factory farming and oil & gas?

        I don’t follow. I need a lot more evidence of harm before I become “very concerned” about datacenters specifically.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1010 months ago

      I don’t think this is something to focus on. Tech being 40% of all emissions in the US is suspicious, given that in 2021, all industry was 30.1%, and all transportation was 28.5%. And the total emissions in the US was 6.3 billion tons. https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/chart-gallery/gallery/chart-detail/?chartId=108623

      I don’t have more recent data (if it’s in the article, I didn’t see it at a skim) but I feel like oil, gas, and agriculture are the bigger long-term targets.

      • ElderReflections
        link
        fedilink
        1110 months ago

        Looks like Techradar misunderstood parts of the source story. The projected emissions over the next 10 years is equal to 40% of all US emissions. The Register

        • rhys
          link
          fedilink
          English
          610 months ago

          That El Reg links breaks this report much better than some other reporting. It projects a tripling of carbon emissions from bit barns by 2030, with 40% of that increase being due to construction and materials fabrication and 60% from their operation.

    • Blaster M
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      It’s a percent against the world’s emissions. Be concerned less with this. AI is the current hate train whipping boy, and takes the pressure of public focus off the biggest polluters.

    • noodle (he/him)
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1810 months ago

      Startpage and DuckDuckGo, but you might want to disable summaries in the latter’s settings.

  • Teknikal
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1110 months ago

    It’s a nice gimmick and sometimes fun but probably not worth it given the state of the planet already.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    10810 months ago

    Between AI and shitcoin mining, these two “technology branches” already consume more power than all the green power added to the grid combined.

    It’s why humans will always remain de facto slaves to a few masters. Anything that could potentially be advantageous to all life on Earth? Only if the ones at the top get to profit first. No profit? Enjoy scorching to death on hell-planet for the next forty years!

    • Todd Bonzalez
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1110 months ago

      Between AI and shitcoin mining, these two “technology branches” already consume more power than all the green power added to the grid combined.

      I think you would be shocked if you learned what some other things in our world cost in CO2.

      The energy costs of cryptocurrency mining are easy to calculate because the system is extremely transparent. AI is a little muddier, but we know how much big tech is expanding data centers, and we know how many enterprise GPUs Nvidia sells, so we get a decent estimate.

      But these things don’t actually do as much damage as compared to other things. Imagine how much energy is used for Gaming PCs and consoles. It’s probably up there with Crypto and AI if you consider all running consoles and PCs, plus all the multiplayer infrastructure. But we don’t have numbers because this is hard to calculate.

      And then there’s stuff like personal automobiles, that completely blow these other things out-of-the-water.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        610 months ago

        Or compare to the CO2 put out by global concrete construction. It’s more than some might believe.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          7
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Yes but concrete is required. It is literally the foundation of modern civilization. It is the second most used substance on the planet after water. Without it we would have to do away with things like roads, power plants (green and carbon emitting), housing, water treatment and waste treatment plants, erosion control and seawalls, and most production facilities for all of our day to day goods and essentials.

          The industry is making steps to reduce its up front carbon cost and inrease captured carbon in the concrete, but it is slow moving as big changes can cause major problems with infrastructure. Noone wants their hospital falling down because they used a new mix design that hasn’t been thoroughly tested and tried.

          We dont work without concrete, but i’m pretty sure we do work without bitcoin.

          If your just looking at fun carbon emitting facts though, then aluminum smelting is another huge number like 4% globally. Concrete is like 7% globally, and HVAC is like 12%.

          https://sustainability.mit.edu/article/cleaning-one-worlds-most-commonly-used-substances#:~:text=Concrete is the second most,it’s used to make concrete.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          9
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Quit the whataboutism. While the construction industry is in dire need of improvements, it’s at least causing GHG emissions to achieve a useful goal, unlike ShitGPT which repeatedly fails to prove its value when opposed to its environmental costs.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      610 months ago

      I dont think much will remain after this extinction event. Do you know how long it takes niches to refill in an ecosystem? We’re going to get to a point where industry collapses and we are reset if we survive at all.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1410 months ago

        We wouldn’t even be able to restart. All the easily available resources have been delved. Three thousand years ago people could scoop pure gold from rivers by the kilos. Today, all decent deposits lie kilometers below the surface.

        But it’ll be for the best. We had our shot and blew it.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          210 months ago

          Maybe resources will be scarce enough that we are forced to try something other than capitalism, as we have to share to make it anywhere. Or maybe it will just make all resources needed for advanced technologies unavaible. Then we can fight over whose hut is closest to the last river.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1210 months ago

          Resources like gold would be more accessible, y’know because it already been mined and made into things. If society collapses what few survivors there are could recycle shit like metals. The actual issue is fossil fuels. Getting to a point where you can use renewable power would be difficult with using fossil fuels for power first.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4710 months ago

      Between AI and shitcoin mining, these two “technology branches” already consume more power than all the green power added to the grid combined.

      And your sources? I only did a cursory search, and according to the IEA data centers are responsible for somewhere in the range of 2-6% of electricity demand. Renewables are currently around 30% globally.

      Source: https://www.iea.org/reports/electricity-2024

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2610 months ago

        I feel like some people are just emotional reactionaries. They see a certain story, and in their own mind they make the story worse than it is, and treat their feelings as fact.

        I have no sources on this, or proof that this guy in particular is doing that.

        …wait, am I doing it right now???

        Hmmmmm…

      • Kairos
        link
        fedilink
        English
        310 months ago

        Maybe they got confused about total power usage (maybe) being more than the green power added?

    • Blaster M
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      5
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      AI consumes power, yes, it’s projected to triple its environmental impact, yes, but its environmental impact is much less than most other things. If anything, the AI hate train draws angry peoples’ focus off the big polluters that matter.

      “Arrghle AI is in everything and modern cars track you, I’ll just drive a 30+ year old pickup truck because they don’t has no AI tracking nonsense”

      Oil and gas companies: money

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        910 months ago

        Proof of Stake (PoS) is just dollar bonds without regulations. There’s no "difficulty adjustment" to minimize profits, so inequality will just get worse and worse.

  • Ragdoll X
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3710 months ago

    I remember when scientists were more focused on making AI models smaller and more efficient, and research on generative models was focused on making GANs as robust as possible with very little compute and data.

    Now that big companies and rich investors saw the potential for profit in AI the paradigm has shifted to “throw more compute at the wall until something sticks”, so it’s not surprising it’s affecting carbon emissions.

    Besides that it’s also annoying that most of the time they keep their AIs behind closed doors, and even in the few cases where the weights are released publicly these models are so big that they aren’t usable for the vast majority of people, as sometimes even Kaggle can’t handle them.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    710 months ago

    This is posted every week with different numbers. I don’t care if data centers use a lot of electricity. They run very efficiently and are a necessity for our modern lives. You have no idea what is being run inside those data centers ai is so much more than chatgpt.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1010 months ago

      On behalf of all humans suffering from your tech bro arrogance: fuck you and your useless tech. I wish this kind of energy consumption becomes illegal, because it is criminal. Can’t wait for the bubble to finally pop.

      The article mentions generative AI btw, the kind that powers ShitGPT.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        510 months ago

        Ah yes, it’s tech bros that are killing the earth, nothing else, nuh uh couldn’t be anything else 😂 I don’t even like AI in it’s current form but you guys make me chuckle

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          510 months ago

          Whataboutism at its finest 👌

          The difference with other things causing climate change is that some of these other things are actually useful and work, which is not the case with ShitGPT.

          And you can be mad at both simultaneously. You don’t have to decry LLMs only.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            110 months ago

            It’s not really whataboutism though is it, I’m just pointing out that there are alot bigger causes of climate change that can be dealt with immediately additionally to data centers but we don’t, because these things add a convenience to our lives. People could stop eating animal products, people can stop driving cars. I have, it’s easy.

            But people won’t, so I’m pissing my self laughing at this website crying about AI.

            And let’s add that electricity generation doesn’t have to be expensive and carbon intensive, we’ve chosen this course. We keep voting in government that love feeding money into the oil industry, then we get angry when people protest it by sitting on motorways or throwing paint at pieces of art that will be absolutely useless and worthless once society ends due to the climate crisis.

            But it’s fine, let’s believe misleading information like available in this article and cry about companies trying to revolutionise a piece of technology and carrot on eating off the oil Barron’s stick.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              310 months ago

              What if I told you that we can do all these things at once, and don’t have to pick just one. Mindblowing!

              Regarding the alternatives to fossil fuels, they still aren’t free as far as emissions go. It’s still better to not need a new source of power if you can, because they require minerals, fossil fuels, etc. to build.

              Also, an insane strain on the power grid makes the transition to greener sources of electricity more difficult because there’s a bigger demand to satisfy. That delays the transition.

              If you don’t like how “this website” talks about your garbage tech, maybe you can fuck off back to Reddit with the rest of the douchebags who still believe crypto has a future?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    5
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Lesson: only ask AI if you’re still stuck after searching and have no colleague around.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      8
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      This is the “carbon footprint” fallacy created by big oil. We should vote left and unionize until either the external cost of pollution is internalized with pigouvian taxes, or electricity is rationed by a community-owned organization.

      Nobody will notice us shooting ourselves in the foot and expecting corporations to do it too. They don’t care if we lead by example unilaterally.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    210 months ago

    Where are their numbers coming from? The central registry of carbon emissions for genAI data centers? They know shit. They’re probably shorting Nvidia and are crying over their losses. Fuck Morgan Stanley

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1410 months ago

    Every IT company now: we should increase our server costs by 100x to offer unwanted gimmicks that users don’t want and aren’t willing to pay

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1010 months ago

    “The only way to interpret statistics is with a healthy dose of skepticism and a thorough understanding of their context.”

    While people in this thread jump at the opportunity for this slice of statistics to affirm their confirmation biases, intelligent people will ask what the total carbon dioxide output looks like by comparison.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1010 months ago

      You’re quick to imply that this study is bullshit, yet offer no counter argument except “believing statistics is for losers lul”

      So where are your sources to refute the article?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        710 months ago

        Ita also trivial to come to the same conclusion at a smaller scale.

        You can run a LLM at home and see the amount of GPU & power resources it takes to compute the larger models. If I ran that full time, your household bill will most likely be 3x alone.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        310 months ago

        Never said the study was bullshit. I just said to look at the bigger picture.

        I would show you how Google works and provide an article, but your reading comprehension leads me to believe you’d come up with another straw man fallacy to support your confirmation bias.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Oh fuck off already, nobody cares.

          Do we have an iamverysmart community? We could use one.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      610 months ago

      Can’t be logical here. This is a topic that’s like discussing immigration with Republicans.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    27
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Everyone thought AI was going to kill us via some Terminator-like Skynet.

    Nope.

    It’s just going to let us kill ourselves via greed and accelerate destroying the environment.