How much CO2 does AI use compared to other industries? I know it's a horrific use compared to all other software, but have no idea how it factors in global carbon emmissions?
Also, just to be clear, I'm genuinely curious and not defending burning huge amounts of carbon for profit if the AI sector is comparatively small. That kind of backwards "but it just a small amount of everything else" logic would be a great way to accelerate our already too fast death spiral.
Yeah, hopefully this is some genuinely good news, but it's hard not to see it as an unbelievably positive spin on the fact that this year we'll emit more CO2 than any year in record.
I know your comment is satirical so I don't really want to take it in bad faith, but all the same. . . .
Lots of people are working reeaaally hard at changing society for the better, and reducing environmental catastrophe, the studies from the 80s sparked soneof the biggest environmental groups we have today (the likes of Green Peace and Friends of the Earth).
Lots of other people, often with money, are cynically blocking the protection of the human race for their own gain. And the majority of people are caught between these groups, often feeling despondent.
My point is, don't get despondent, get involved! You can join the first groups efforts today, and it you do, you'll be concretely helping the survival of our planet and society.
If you're interested in specifics, both Green Peace and Just Stop Oil hold regular monthly/weekly welcome to all sessions (if you know about others, post them here!)
Thanks for such a well reasoned response 😁 My knee jerk "public transport good" response did miss a lot of the subtlety you've captured here!
AI: "Have you tried funding public transport and regulating the carbon industry?"
Ok, now we need to make a new AI so that AI can solve global warming but without using an existing solution that might marginally inconvenience the mega rich.
Public transport would be a much more effective and cheaper solution, but we're all looking at EVs because it means not having to change anything about the status quo.
I don't agree they're looking at all areas at once, solar, wind and the net zero per mw by 2030 goal only relate to energy, not things like gas heating reduction, or public transport etc. Energy is also one of the few areas where as a country we've already made quite a bit of progress. There are points where only 10% of the UK's energy comes from fossil fuels.
In fairness, I did share the wrong article, sorry! Here's the actual opinion piece it's referring to (which was written in the Sun, I agree it's a shit rag, but Kier Starmer chose to publish in it, so here we are): https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/30853358/keir-starmer-great-british-industry-net-zero/
Specifically, the bits I'm referring to are:
This ground-breaking technology, known as Carbon Capture Usage and Storage, is a game-changer in our efforts to fulfil our legal obligations to reach Net Zero by 2050 in a sensible way, while supporting jobs and industry.
Shifting focus onto onto bare minimum meeting of legal obligations and positioning carbon capture as a central part of that strategy.
To those drum-banging, finger-wagging extremists I say: I will never sacrifice Great British industry.
Said in opposition to people wanting regulation of carbon emissions over carbon capture investment.
But this is a third way that brings industry with us on our path to Net Zero
Again, in opposition to regulating emissions more strictly.
To be 100% clear, this is speculation from Labours messaging that implies they're gearing up for a massive backslide, we won't know for sure until their budget is announced over the next few weeks. I think this is where a lot of objection comes fron though. If we see large investment in public transport and heat pumps, and regulation of emissions, then I'll be extremely happy to be proved wrong.
I 100% agree with you! But I think you're missing some key context on why people are angry about this:
The new UK government is from the center left Labour party, who were elected under the promise (amongst others) that they would do more about carbon change that the previous government
They recently announced funding for carbon capture as the central part of their climate change plan
Their plan to achieve the UK's legally obligated net zero targets (they no longer plan to reduce emissions by anything more than international law mandates) depends on the success of this very unproven technology
The UK prime minister referred to critics of this scheme (which should include pretty much anyone who wants climate policy to be based on scientific evidence rather than lobbying) "finger wagging extremists" in an opinion piece[1]
So, although I'd support investing into climate capture research as part of a much broader carbon reduction plan, this policy is really an incredible backslide and a massive betrayal of anyone who voted for the party on the basis of their climate change policies.
Edit: spelling!
[1] https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/30855560/keir-starmer-ignore-climate-extremists/
It's good to see some JSO court news that isn't peaceful protesters going to jail with crazy harsh rulings.
I know this isn't the important issue, but my brain is really forcing me to ask:
How did this protest work? What kind or glue? Was it some super strong glue or something? How did they get unstuck? MY CHILDISH BRAIN NEEDS MORE INFO ON THE STICKINESS OF THE GLUE!
If the government actually want people to install heat pumps (I hope they do) they really need a lot more policy.
The current £7,500 grant sounds great, but when you look at British Gas' installation estimates[1], it costs about £5,000 more than that on average to carry out an installation. That means even for customers who have to install a new heating system (i.e. their current boiler is broken beyond repair) it is still substantially cheaper to install a combi-boiler (less than half the price on average).
And that's people who have to install a new system- if we want to move from fossil fuels we need people to replace working boilers with heat pumps.
Honestly, the government has a tonne of levers it can pull, but any serious plan needs to not rely on people making hard to afford decisions because they are environmentally justified. They beed to actually do something so that the relstive emissions of heating get reflected in the cost of systems and fuel.
[1] https://www.britishgas.co.uk/heating/air-source-heat-pumps/carbon-cruncher.html
Gonna skirt right round the serious discussion about oil company based misinformation here and point out that his suit is an extreme act of terror on the seeing.