this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2025
53 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

38512 readers
114 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

(…) There’s something familiar about the suggestion that it’s okay to build data centers that run on fossil fuels today because AI tools will help the world drive down emissions eventually. It recalls the purported promise of carbon credits: that it’s fine for a company to carry on polluting at its headquarters or plants, so long as it’s also funding, say, the planting of trees that will suck up a commensurate level of carbon dioxide.

Unfortunately, we’ve seen again and again that such programs often overstate any climate benefits, doing little to alter the balance of what’s going into or coming out of the atmosphere.  

But in the case of what we might call “AI offsets,” the potential to overstate the gains may be greater, because the promised benefits wouldn’t meaningfully accrue for years or decades. Plus, there’s no market or regulatory mechanism to hold the industry accountable if it ends up building huge data centers that drive up emissions but never delivers on these climate claims. 

The IEA report outlines instances where industries are already using AI in ways that could help drive down emissions, including detecting methane leaks in oil and gas infrastructure, making power plants and manufacturing facilities more efficient, and reducing energy consumption in buildings.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Well AGI would solve climate change in a hearbeat but nobody knows wether it'll take 5 or 500 years to get there or what other consequences comes with it. Personally I tend to think that we don't solve it by cutting emissions but rather with technology wether that be carbon capture or not. This is something AI at least has the potential to help us with.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I'm not sure AGI would. Maybe ASI. But in the end it's still humans that would likely have to enact whatever proposals it came up with.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Its solution is nuclear winter.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

Well, you can't argue that it wouldn't work ;-)

load more comments (1 replies)