Believe me when I tell you that, of all the hatred that generative AI may awaken regarding how it can turn around a hundred industries and jobs, I am one of those on the fence when a computer in, I don’t know, Wisconsin, can do this text in seconds and much cheaper. So this study has hurt me especially. But the data is the data, and what is reflected in Scientific Reports is that AI systems emit much less CO2 than humans when writing or illustrating in a conventional way.
In particular, they talk about between 130 and 1,5000 times less CO2 per text page, and between 310 and 2,900 times less CO2 per image. When comparing both options, they acknowledge that artificial intelligence has a lower environmental impact on the planet’s pollution. How on earth is that possible if we are tired of hearing about everything that computers consuming shaping artificial intelligence? Here comes the trick.
The pollution of AI vs. a human
What the study analyzed is that the training of these AI models like OpenAI or ChatGPT involves generating energy and maintaining thousands of systems capable of processing data through thousands of hours of GPU use. They also require constant cooling to avoid equipment overheating, further raising energy consumption and CO2 emissions to the level of several vehicles throughout their lifetime. That’s something.
However, once the model is trained, and despite still remaining at worrying levels, the carbon emissions generated by AI when writing or illustrating are far below what a human generates performing the same tasks. If we put someone writing a multi-page book against a trained artificial intelligence doing the same, the human loses in terms of energy consumption.
Although levels vary depending on the country in which the author is located, when analyzing the average CO2 emissions of author X, including the energy consumption of their computer, the lighting of their space, breaks, and the time spent not doing that task, even removing the use of a vehicle to commute to the office, the CO2 emissions of a single text page are between 130 to 1,5000 times higher than generative AI.
Can we use AI for good, for example by inviting it to analyze our systems to reduce the carbon footprint of that human, instead of taking away their job under the pretext that it is more efficient and less polluting? We could, indeed, but I’m afraid that, at least for now, that moment has not yet arrived.
Image | Tought Catalog
In 3DJuegos | Nvidia’s CEO wants us to have an R2-D2 or a C3PO at home, and it says a lot about the company’s shift towards artificial intelligence
In 3DJuegos | Generative Artificial Intelligence “is not a trend, it is our future.” EA has already made internal changes to embrace AI in its projects
