I'm glad somebody out there is brave enough to push back against the "personal ChatGPT usage is terrible for the environment" message https://andymasley.substack.com/p/a-cheat-sheet-for-conversations-about

"If you want to prompt ChatGPT 40 times, you can just stop your shower 1 second early."

"If I choose not to take a flight to Europe, I save 3,500,000 ChatGPT searches. this is like stopping more than 7 people from searching ChatGPT for their entire lives."

Using ChatGPT is not bad for the environment - a cheat sheet

The numbers clearly show this is a pointless distraction for the climate movement

Andy Masley
Here's a follow-up by someone with a whole lot more credibility than myself or Andy: Hannah Ritchie is "Head of Research at Our World in Data, and a Senior Researcher at the University of Oxford" and runs a high quality sustainable energy blog https://www.sustainabilitybynumbers.com/p/carbon-footprint-chatgpt
What's the carbon footprint of using ChatGPT?

Very small compared to most of the other stuff you do.

Sustainability by numbers

@simon Counterpoint: the environmental impact of individuals' personal use of genAI ("here's my cute action figure!" etc) may be negligible, but in aggregate it arguably has a massive role to play in legitimising the current wave of data centre buildouts by hyperscalers, VCs etc. And for now [*] that's only possible through undermining or abandoning prior Net Zero commitments.

[*] Future visions of yeeting data centres into space notwithstanding: https://arstechnica.com/space/2025/05/eric-schmidt-apparently-bought-relativity-space-to-put-data-centers-in-orbit/

Eric Schmidt apparently bought Relativity Space to put data centers in orbit

“Gives you a sense of how big this crisis is.”…

Ars Technica
@m No one believes this will actually happen. One of the most demanding tasks of a server farm is cooling, which is notoriously hard in space. And there are no upsides (solar is out ~1/2 of the time as well, buidling is more expensive).
@tobtobxx @m fyi you can get interesting orbits which give you 24/7 sunlight e.g. Sun-synchronous orbits, + you gain about 30% by avoiding atmospheric absorption. Cooling is definitely the extremely hard part and from what I've seen nobody's proposed a good scalable solution

@Smoljaguar Oops, yeah, I forgot that. Though you do not want to go outside of of earths magnetic field.

All in all, I think this is just hype. It doesn't make sense at all, even if you require 3x as much solar arrays on earths surface, it'd still be way cheaper to build and maintain.

... it would however pour some of that investor money into the space industry, which I wouldn't object to.

@tobtobxx yeah, there are also many other issues and apparently lots of the analysis is hyper-optimistic (https://www.tumblr.com/oscillatingheatpipe/781648495436267520)
Post by @oscillatingheatpipe

💬 1  🔁 12  ❤️ 42 · There's a company out there, Starcloud, that's trying to do orbital datacenters. They claim that it solar is more plentiful, and heat is easier to manage. Seems like heat should…

Tumblr