byElena Nicholson
I’ve been a vegetarian for seven years. As a kid, I naturally felt powerless in the face of mounting climate concerns and worldwide conflicts that felt so frustratingly insurmountable. I used to think I was alone in this feeling, but now I find that it deeply resonates with many other young people as well. For me, vegetarianism was a means of fighting against “the man,” choosing to do something positive for my environment and the world around me, despite its inconvenience.
Though my generation heads into adulthood with a slew of massive issues to face, climate change sticks out among the most pressing. It’s difficult to look at issues like this rationally, but by focusing on specific elements to tackle on a smaller scale first, they can seem a little less intractable. For my middle school self, that meant making a change in my diet to combat the exorbitant greenhouse gas emissions associated with meat production in the United States. Today, this means personally taking on a new environmental nightmare created by students’ new favorite homework helper — artificial intelligence.
In the technological age, AI, while accessible at your fingertips, is a sustainability issue that students can personally take on. AI consumes energy and water resources, and its continued usage is a reflection of our willingness to prioritize short-term efficiency at the cost of long-term survival. Grassroots movements have great power, and calculated action starts one person at a time. Climate change is not as far removed from our individual actions as we might think, and each person’s habits have a tangible impact, so it is important to act accordingly. This starts by reducing our AI usage.
AI requires immense amounts of energy to both be trained and run. In a prime example, training the OpenAI GPT-3 system consumed the same amount of energy needed to power 130 American homes for an entire year, placing strain on resources that were already lacking. Unsurprisingly, most of this energy is not sourced from renewable sources like wind or solar. The majority currently comes from natural gas extraction, though many tech companies have promised a shift towards more renewable resources.
Beyond that, research reveals that one 100-word email written by ChatGPT consumes 519 milliliters of water for cooling, a bit more than a plastic bottle’s worth. One non-AI Google search requires about 0.3 watt-hours of energy, while a standard AI search consumes about 2.9 watt-hours. With strain on energy continuing and carbon emissions soaring higher, studies project that AI data centers will rise to use 8% of energy in the United States by 2030.
People are also utilizing AI without even realizing it. People have a right to know when the products and sites they use on a daily basis are powered by AI. They deserve the choice to turn off its use; in a Google search, one can turn off AI-summary searches using a chrome extension, and this level of choice should be the standard.
The greatest benefit AI offers humanity is its ability to increase human output and efficiency. But where does this increase in efficiency end? If people can no longer survive on the planet at their current rate of energy usage, is AI worth the environmental degradation of our natural resources? If we continue to develop technologies to increase our own ability to work without thinking about environmental implications, we will reach a tipping point. Efficiency cannot be the most important factor when Earth’s survival is in question.
Individual action against AI use could culminate in a collective movement toward a better future. In personally deciding to limit your use of AI, you choose to join a movement for protecting Earth’s natural resources from climate change.
While large corporations are to blame for much of the climate crisis, each person on this planet has influence on these companies and their ability to function successfully. In 1778, British abolitionists boycotted sugar produced by slaves in the West Indies, and sales dropped by around a third while awareness for the atrocities of slavery increased. In 1965, millions of people boycotted grapes until growers enforced better standards for their workers, affecting sales so dramatically that United Farm Workers of America established unions to ensure safe working conditions. Boycotts can successfully combat corporations’ influence, and we maintain this power by boycotting AI in day to day life.
86% of students already harness AI power in their daily work. Paradoxically, students that over-utilize AI are not the ones who will feel the effects of its environmental and economic burden. Climate-vulnerable areas like South Sudan, Bangladesh and Nigeria will be the first to feel the impact of overextended energy usage, as will countries that work to maintain AI systems. AI’s history is intertwined with the exploitation of a massive labor force in countries like Kenya, India and Uganda. These people are underpaid, making about $2 an hour, working grueling hours on AI systems.
AI may be the future, but until it is powered by a more sustainable energy infrastructure, the best way to combat its influence is to stop relying on it for everyday tasks.
Think for yourself.
AI usage is highly addictive because it increases one’s productivity, but its environmental cost does not justify its efficiency. Though it may be difficult to visualize the impact AI is having on others and our world, you have a personal stake in the climate crisis. Using AI less, despite the temptation, is an easy way to begin a path towards decreasing the influence that major tech corporations have on societal energy usage and environmental degradation.
I might not be turning the world order on its head with my choice to be vegetarian or to use AI minimally, but these small actions represent the change that I think the world needs. If more people act deliberately and meaningfully against technology and corporations that harm the planet, collective action can and will prove effective to salvage our planet.
Elena Nicholson is an Opinion Columnist from Basking Ridge, NJ. She writes about environmental issues and climate change in her column “Climate Watch.” She can be reached at elenagn@umich.edu.
