Technology

59587 readers

2689 users here now

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

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

138

Because AI and Crypto use so much electricity, what if a law was made that they had to power it with green energy? (self.technology)

submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by therealjcdenton to c/[email protected]

79 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Something on the lines of if your company facility is using over X amount of energy the majority of that has to be from a green source such as solar power. What would happen and is this feasible or am I totally thinking about this wrong

Edit: Good responses from everyone, my point in asking this was completely hypothetical, ignoring how hard it would be to implement a restriction. My own thoughts are that requiring the use of renewable energy for high electricity products could help spur the demand for it as now it's a requirement. Of course companies would fight back, they want money

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Why not just pass a law that no one can generate electricity except from green sources? It sounds so easy when I put it like that.

Are you thinking that sprinkling the buzzwords "AI" and "Crypto" on an "only green energy" kind of provision would allow lawmakers to leverage hype to cut through right-wing resistence to green energy mandates in a way that a more blanket (or even just not-Crypto/AI-focused) provision couldn't?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Why not just pass a law that no one can generate electricity except from green sources? It sounds so easy when I put it like that.

Um - those laws have been passed in many countries. Usually with a reasonable approach such as "you can continue operating the coal plants that were already built, but no more can be built".

What's actually happening around the world though is those plants are becoming too expensive to run, so they're shutting down even if they are allowed to continue to operate. Renewable power is just cheaper.

About two thirds of global electricity production is zero emission now and it'll be around 95% in a 25 years or so.

Source (note: this is a "renewables" article, not a "zero emission" article. Some non-renewable energy produces zero emissions and there's not expected to be much movement on that in the foreseeable future): https://renewablesnow.com/news/renewables-produce-85-of-global-power-nearly-50-of-energy-in-2050-582235/

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

Um - those laws have been passed in many countries.

Yeah, I know. I just wondered what putting a "but only for AI and crypto applications" as OP said added to the conversation.

In civilized places, e.g. not the U.S. (it's cool, I'm American), where it's not a struggle to get any environmental legislation passed, adding "AI and crypto" to the conversation is unnecessary. In the U.S. where the minority of conspiracy theorists get what they want through cheating, I doubt adding AI and crypto to the conversation is going to help any.