this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2024
173 points (100.0% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

149 readers
18 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world.  About 1C of total warming.  Second chart:  about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability.  Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases.  About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 13 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

de Vries, who now works for the Netherlands’ central bank, estimated that if Google were to integrate generative A.I. into every search, its electricity use would rise to something like twenty-nine billion kilowatt-hours per year. This is more than is consumed by many countries, including Kenya, Guatemala, and Croatia.

Why on earth would they do that? Just cache the common questions.

It’s been estimated that ChatGPT is responding to something like two hundred million requests per day, and, in so doing, is consuming more than half a million kilowatt-hours of electricity. (For comparison’s sake, the average U.S. household consumes twenty-nine kilowatt-hours a day.)

Ok, so the actual real world estimate is somewhere on the order of a million kilowatt-hours, for the entire globe. Even if we assume that's just US, there are 125M households, so that's 4 watt-hours per household per day. A LED lightbulb consumes 8 watts. Turn one of those off for a half-hour and you've balanced out one household's worth of ChatGPT energy use.

This feels very much in the "turn off your lights to do you part for climate change" distraction from industry and air travel. They've mixed and matched units in their comparisons to make it seem like this is a massive amount of electricity, but it's basically irrelevant. Even the big AI-every-search number only works out to 0.6 kwh/day (again, if all search was only done by Americans), which isn't great, but is still on the order of don't spend hours watching a big screen TV or playing on a gaming computer, and compares to the 29 kwh already spent.

Math, because this result is so irrelevant it feels like I've done something wrong:

  • 500,000 kwh/day / 125,000,000 US households = 0.004 kwh/household/day
  • 29,000,000,000 kwh/yr / 365 days/yr / 125,000,000 households = 0.6 kwh/household/day, compared to 29 kwh base
[–] kibiz0r@midwest.social 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Just cache the common questions.

There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache invalidation and naming things.

[–] boonhet@lemm.ee 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You mean: two hard things - cache invalidation, naming things and off-by-one errors

[–] kibiz0r@midwest.social 3 points 8 months ago

Reminds me of the two hard things in distributed systems:

  • 2: Exactly-once delivery
  • 1: Guaranteed order
  • 2: Exactly-once delivery
[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 2 points 8 months ago

It's a good thing that Google has a massive pre-existing business about caching and updating search responses then. The naming things side of their business could probably use some more work though.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Just cache the common questions.

AI models work in a feedback loop. The fact that you're asking the question becomes part of the response next time. They could cache it, but the model is worse off for it.

Also, they are Google/Microsoft/OpenAI. They will do it because they can and nobody is stopping them.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 1 points 8 months ago

This is AI for search, not AI as a chatbot. And in the search context many requests are functionally similar and can have the same response. You can extract a theme to create contextual breadcrumbs that will be effectively the same as other people doing similar things. People looking for Thai food in Los Angeles will generally follow similar patterns and need similar responses, even if it comes in the form of several successive searches framed as sentences with different word ordering and choices.

And none of this is updating the model (at least not in a real-time sense that would require re-running a cached search), it's all short-term context fed in as additional inputs.

[–] stabby_cicada@slrpnk.net 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

So I did a little math.

This site says a single ChatGPT query consumes 0.00396 KWh.

Assume an average LED light bulb is 10 watts, or 0.01 kwh/hr. So if I did the math right, no guarantees there, a single ChatGPT query is roughly equivalent to leaving a light bulb on for 20 minutes.

So if you assume the average light bulb in your house is on a little more than 3 hours a day, if you make 10 ChatGPT queries per day it's the equivalent of adding a new light bulb to your house.

Which is definitely not nothing. But isn't the end of the world either.

[–] Zink@programming.dev 2 points 8 months ago

I have a feeling it’s not going to be the ordinary individual user that’s going to drive the usage to problematic levels.

If a company can make money off of it, consuming a ridiculous amount of energy to do it is just another cost on the P & L.

(Assuming of course that the company using it either pays the electric bill, or pays a marked-up fee to some AI/cloud provider)

[–] sacredmelon@slrpnk.net 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

This is concerning, why they just dont stop the never ending updates and just stick with the latest things we have for a moment? Isnt all the tech stuff we have sufficient for the world to keep going?

[–] ColonelPanic@lemm.ee 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] sacredmelon@slrpnk.net 1 points 8 months ago

I got you up buddy dont worry

[–] Daxtron2@startrek.website 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The bigger companies focus on huge model sizes instead and ever increasing them. Lots of advanced are being made with smaller and more affordable models that can be run on consumer devices but the big companies don't focus on that as it can't generate as much profit.

[–] sonori 4 points 8 months ago

The problem is that all of the current discussion and hype is about Chat GPT and similar whole internet models. They are not as useful as more specialized small model ones, but they also not as easy to hype.