It probably consumes as much energy as a family house for a day just to come up with that program. That’s what happens.
In fact, I did a Google search and didn’t have any choice but to have an “AI” answer, even if I don’t want it. Here’s what it says:
Each ChatGPT query is estimated to use around 10 times more electricity than a traditional Google search, with a single query consuming approximately 3 watt-hours, compared to 0.3 watt-hours for a Google search. This translates to a daily energy consumption of over half a million kilowatts, equivalent to the power used by 180,000 US households.
daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 days ago
Average daily energy consumption for a family in the US is said to be around 30.000 wh per day.
That would be about 10.000 chatgpt queries per day to equal that.
pedz@lemmy.ca 3 days ago
That must be why Google’s greenhouse emissions went up 50% in five years. ChatGPT’s legendary efficiency.
Keep defending those power wasting glorified autocomplete. In no way are we doomed as a species.
We can just continue tu pump more and more into the air. “AI” will surely find a solution for that anyway.
daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 days ago
Google is not related with chatgpt. Chatgpt parent company is openAI which is a competitor with google.
A more rational explanation is that technology and digital services on general have been growing and are on the rise. Both because more and more complex services are being offered, and more importantly more people are requesting those services. Whole continents that used not to be cover by digital services are now covered. Generative AI is just a very small part of all that.
The best approach to reduce CO2 emissions is to ask for a reduction in human population. From my point of view is the only rational approach, as with a growing population there’s only to solutions, pollute until we die, or reduce quality of life until life is not worth living. Reducing population allows for fewer people to live better loves without destroying the planet.