...for a 5 second video. People are gonna be making movies on this shit. 1.44 MWh for a 2 hr movie sound ok? Maybe make an animated series, 10 eps 30 min for a meager 3.5 MWh?
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
Put it in your terms - based on the lowest one you mentioned, 570g natural gas estimate, a 10 eps 30 min series would produce roughly 2,000 kg CO2, about the same as a large/luxury car produces in an entire year. And that's just one guy fucking around with it for a while.
That's a lot less than it currently takes to make films with those numbers so. Maybe attack AI from a different angle? BAFTA estimated about 5.5 Mt CO2e for a typical film. This is 1.3 Mt CO2e using coal, the worst polluter, using nat gas it's a lot less, renews is 0. It's just not a lot of energy.
Again I'm not an AI person, and ChatGPT is atrocious for many reasons. But energy efficiency is just not one of them. You can run an AI chatbot on your phone easily, that's not the sign of an energy guzzler. I wish I had hard numbers on animated films to compare but those, I got 100 Mt CO2e est.
I don't think the argument is ONLY from an environmental POV. For me the biggest argument against genAI is the impact on labor, and having no backup plan while the economic model demands people work for a living. But even so, the environmental argument can't be dismissed through "whataboutism".
Comments