Why focusing on the energy system and large companies is more important than policing individual behavior.
Picture this: I’m at a party, standing by the snack table when a friend of a friend approaches. We start talking, and when they learn I report on climate technology, they ask, “Should I be using AI? I’ve heard it’s terrible for the environment.” This question comes up quite often.
I usually tell people not to stress about it—use AI to plan vacations, suggest recipes, or even write poems if you want. That might seem surprising, but I’m not ignoring the troubling forecasts about AI’s energy use. Data centers might consume up to 945 terawatt-hours yearly by 2030, about the same as Japan’s current consumption.
Still, I believe the focus should not fall on individuals. AI concerns remind me of the question, “What can I do to reduce my carbon footprint?” That phrase was popularized by BP in the early 2000s through a marketing campaign, which shifted responsibility away from fossil fuel companies to individuals.
"No one person can address climate change alone: Our entire society is built around burning fossil fuels."
The reality is that systemic change targeting energy systems and big corporations is essential to effectively combat climate change.
Shifting responsibility from individuals to systemic change in energy and corporate practices is key to addressing AI’s environmental impact effectively.
Would you like the tone to be more formal or conversational?