9
top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Cool, now how much power was consumed before even a single prompt was ran in training that model, and how much power is consumed on an ongoing basis adding new data to those AI models even without user prompts. Also how much power was consumed with each query before AI was shoved down our throats, and how many prompts does an average user make per day?

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I did some quick math with metas llama model and the training cost was about a flight to Europe worth of energy, not a lot when you take in the amount of people that use it compared to the flight.

Whatever you're imagining as the impact, it's probably a lot less. AI is much closer to video games then things that are actually a problem for the environment like cars, planes, deep sea fishing, mining, etc. The impact is virtually zero if we had a proper grid based on renewable.

[-] Damage@feddit.it 2 points 3 weeks ago

If their energy consumption actually was so small, why are they seeking to use nuclear reactors to power data centres now?

[-] null@lemmy.nullspace.lol 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Because demand for data centers is rising, with AI as just one of many reasons.

But that's not as flashy as telling people it takes the energy of a small country to make a picture of a cat.

Also interesting that we're ignoring something here -- big tech is chasing cheap sources of clean energy. Don't we want cheap, clean energy?

[-] Dojan@pawb.social 1 points 3 weeks ago

Sure we do. Do we want the big tech corporations to hold the reins of that though?

[-] Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago

Volume of requests and power consumption requirements unrelated to requests made, at least I have to assume. Certainly doesn't help that google has forced me to make a request to their ai every time I run a standard search.

[-] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago

Seriously. I'd be somewhat less concerned about the impact if it was only voluntarily used. Instead, AI is compulsively shoved in every nook and cranny of digital product simply to justify its own existence.

The power requirement for training is ongoing, since mere days after Sam Altman released a very underehelming GPT-5, he begins hyping up the next one.

[-] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

That's not small....

100's of Gigawatts is how much energy that is. Fuel is pretty damn energy dense.

A Boeing 777 might burn 45k Kg of fuel, at a density of 47Mj/kg. Which comes out to... 600 Megawatts

Or about 60 houses energy usage for a year in the U.S.


It's an asinine way to measure it to be fair, not only is it incredibly ambiguous, but almost no one has any reference as to how much energy that actually is.

[-] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 2 points 3 weeks ago

I'd like to understand what this math was before accepting this as fact.

[-] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

A flight to Europe's worth of energy is a pretty asinine way to measure this. Is it not?

It's also not that small the number, being ~600 Megawatts of energy.

However, training cost is considerably less than prompting cost. Making your argument incredibly biased.

Similarly, the numbers released by Google seem artificially low, perhaps their TPUs are massively more efficient given they are ASICs. But they did not seem to disclose what model they are using for this measurement, It could be their smallest, least capable and most energy efficient model which would be disingenuous.

[-] rowrowrowyourboat@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago

This feels like PR bullshit to make people feel like AI isn't all that bad. Assuming what they're releasing is even true. Not like cigarette, oil, or sugar companies ever lied or anything and put out false studies and misleading data.

However, there are still details that the company isn’t sharing in this report. One major question mark is the total number of queries that Gemini gets each day, which would allow estimates of the AI tool’s total energy demand.

Why wouldn't they release this. Even if each query uses minimal energy, but there are countless of them a day, it would mean a huge use of energy.

Which is probably what's happening and why they're not releasing that number.

[-] the_q@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 weeks ago

That's because it is. This is to help fence riders feel better about using a product that factually consumes insane amounts of resources.

[-] frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 3 weeks ago

The company has signed agreements to buy over 22 gigawatts of power from sources including solar, wind, geothermal, and advanced nuclear projects since 2010.

None of those advanced nuclear projects are yet actually delivering power, AFAIK. They're mostly in planning stages.

The above isn't all to run AI, of course. Nobody was thinking about datacenters just for AI training in 2010. But to be clear, there are 94 nuclear power plants in the US, and a rule of thumb is that they produce 1GW each. So Google is taking up the equivalent of roughly one quarter of the entire US nuclear power industry, but doing it with solar/wind/geothermal that could be used to drop our fossil fuel dependence elsewhere.

How much of that is used to run AI isn't clear here, but we know it has to be a lot.

[-] wewbull@feddit.uk 1 points 2 weeks ago

None of those advanced nuclear projects are yet actually delivering power, AFAIK.

...and they won't be for at least 5-10 years. In the meantime they'll just use public infrastructure and then when their generation plans fall through they'll just keep doing that.

this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2025
9 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

75027 readers
387 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS