“There is no love of life without despair of life,” Albert Camus wrote between two world wars. There are many species of despair — the private despair of ill health and heartbreak, the public despair we call politics, the existential despair of bearing our transience and our utter insignificance to the life of the cosmos.
In the autumn of 1978, Audre Lorde (February 18, 1934–November 17, 1992) faced several species at once as a grim diagnosis first interrupted, then fortified her work as one the most personal yet most politically consequential voices of the past century. “The shortest statement of philosophy I have is my living, or the word ‘I,’” she had written in the prime of her life, in the bloom of health. Now, she came to hone her philosophy on the sharp edge of her mortality.
“Spring comes, and still I feel despair like a pale cloud waiting to consume me,” she writes at the outset of what became The Cancer Journals (public library) — Lorde’s effort, blazingly successful, “to give form with honesty and precision to the pain faith labor and loving which this period of my life has translated into strength.” Like all translation, however, it was a demanding task, a creative task, a task that required learning a new language of being well enough to channel through it the poetry of being alive.
Audre Lorde
It begins with the stammer of incomprehension that follows every existential shock: She finds herself “not feeling very hopeful these days, about selfhood or anything else.” But soon she discovers that the only way out of that “molten despair” is through.
In consonance with poet May Sarton’s hard-won insistence that “sometimes one has simply to endure a period of depression for what it may hold of illumination if one can live through it, attentive to what it exposes or demands,” Lorde comes to see how it is precisely by allowing the despair that she can reach beyond it:
If I can look directly at my life and my death without flinching I know there is nothing they can ever do to me again. I must be content to see how really little I can do and still do it with an open heart… I must let this pain flow through me and pass on. If I resist or try to stop it, it will detonate inside me, shatter me, splatter my pieces against every wall and person that I touch.
Along the way, consumed with writing while trying to stay alive, she trembles with the question haunting every artist: “What is this work all for?” But then, upon finishing a novel, she looks back to see it had been a lifeline. In what is by far the most concise, precise manifesto for those of us who process our loves and our losses in writing — or do whatever the world sees as our work — she reflects:
I do not have to win in order to know my dreams are valid, I only have to believe in a process of which I am a part. My work kept me alive this past year, my work and the love of women. They are inseparable from each other. In the recognition of the existence of love lies the answer to despair. Work is that recognition given voice and name.
Calibrating her personal suffering against “the enormity of our task, to turn the world around,” and coming to see that despair “means destruction,” she allows her despair — that is, feels it — then refuses it — that is, refuses to act out of it, to live into it:
How do I fight the despair born of fear and anger and powerlessness which is my greatest internal enemy? I have found that battling despair does not mean closing my eyes to the enormity of the tasks of effecting change, nor ignoring the strength and the barbarity of the forces aligned against us. It means teaching, surviving and fighting with the most important resource I have, myself, and taking joy in that battle. It means, for me, recognizing the enemy outside and the enemy within, and knowing that my work is part of a continuum of women’s work, of reclaiming this earth and our power, and knowing that this work did not begin with my birth nor will it end with my death. And it means knowing that within this continuum, my life and my love and my work has particular power and meaning… It means trout fishing on the Missisquoi River at dawn and tasting the green silence, and knowing that this beauty too is mine forever.
Depiction of Confucius by Wu Daozi, 8th century CE
“Be not ashamed of mistakes and thus make them crimes.”
~ Confucius
Confucius, born Kong Qiu, was a Chinese philosopher of the Spring and Autumn period who is traditionally considered the paragon of Chinese sages. Much of the shared cultural heritage of the Sinosphere originates in the philosophy and teachings of Confucius. Wikipedia
My father has a way of assuming the absolute worst in any situation, whether it’s real or imagined. Therapists call this pattern of thinking “catastrophizing.”
One of my dad’s favorite expressions is “It’s your funeral.” When he visits, he conducts a thorough inspection of my home, which is followed by grim pronouncements.
Last week, he emerged from my basement with a somber expression: “I guarantee you, it’s mold,” he said. “Get that inspected, pronto, or it’s your funeral.”
I don’t envision my funeral quite as often as my father does — but when I’m stressed, my worries escalate, too.
One method I use to corral my spiraling thoughts was developed by Martin Seligman, the director of the Penn Positive Psychology Center and a leading authority on happiness. He studies how people build resilience and has found that how we describe our hardships to ourselves can influence how we view them.
In his decades of research, Dr. Seligman has developed a three-part framework people can use to interpret life’s challenges: permanence, pervasiveness and agency. I find it helpful to pose a question about each one when I’m feeling out of control.
Is this problem permanent?
Our brains are wired to focus on negative events more intensely than on positive ones, and they tend to linger in our minds longer. This can make a problem feel as if it’s here to stay — even if it isn’t.
So when patients tell Dr. Seligman that they are anxious about something, he asks whether it is temporary. “Is it just this one situation? Is it going to hurt you only right now?” he asks. “Or is it going to last?’”
Knowing that your problem has an end point can help you shift from a state of emergency to tolerance, even if it’s painful in the meantime, said Eric Zimmer, author of “How a Little Becomes a Lot.”
Zimmer asks himself whether an issue will still bother him in five hours, five days or five weeks. If you determine that something will still worry you in five weeks, Zimmer said, then you can direct energy and resources toward dealing with it.
Is this problem pervasive?
Sometimes a misstep or a crisis can cause us to generalize, drawing sweeping conclusions from one event. An example, Dr. Seligman said, is telling yourself you’re unlovable after a breakup, as opposed to “‘I never should have hooked up with him to begin with.’”
To harness your spiraling thoughts, Zimmer suggests asking yourself: Is this problem really affecting every single aspect of my life? What areas remain unaffected and positive?
When we are in the midst of a difficult situation, “we can get so myopically focused that it looks enormous,” Zimmer said.
Instead, he said, “zoom out and look at the whole picture.”
Before he had his podcast, Zimmer started a solar energy business that eventually folded. At first, he told himself he was a failure. But when he asked himself if this problem was pervasive, he realized that he wasn’t a failure — it was his business that had failed.
Where do I have agency with this problem?
Dr. Seligman originally thought that personalization — the belief that negative events are all our fault — determined how a person viewed and weathered problems. But now he believes that agency, or the ability to take actions and make decisions that affect our lives, is a more important factor.
After you have acknowledged an ordeal, Dr. Seligman said, you can ask yourself, “‘What can I plan to do about it?’”
Pinpoint what is within your control — write it down if it helps — to figure out where you have agency, he said. For the most part, Dr. Seligman added, there is “almost always” something that you can find.
When Zimmer is brainstorming solutions to an issue, he tries to see it as a puzzle instead of a problem, a concept he learned from the music producer Quincy Jones. “It allows me to think that in many cases, there is indeed a solution,” Zimmer said. “I just need to find it.”
When it comes to my smelly basement, my dad has worn me down. I’m going to do what he suggests and call a mold guy: “Puzzle” solved.
In Buddhism, sati (a Pali word) translates directly to mindfulness or awareness. It is a fundamental mental quality that involves keeping one’s attention anchored in the present moment. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Here is a breakdown of its meaning, role, and practice in Buddhist philosophy:
Core Meaning and Psychology
Literal Translation: The word originally means “memory” or “to remember.” In practice, it means remembering to maintain awareness of the present moment without drifting into distraction.
Objective Observation:Sati allows you to see things exactly as they are right now. It is a lucid, non-judgmental awareness that observes thoughts, emotions, and physical sensations without reacting to them with desire or anger.
The Opposite of Forgetting: It acts as an antidote to mental drifting, preventing the mind from falling into autopilot, confusion, or forgetfulness. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Role in Buddhist Teachings
The Eightfold Path: It is the seventh element, known as Right Mindfulness (Sammā-sati). It serves as the bridge between mental concentration and liberating wisdom.
Factors of Enlightenment: It is the very first of the Seven Factors of Enlightenment, acting as the trigger that activates all other qualities like investigation, energy, and joy. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
How it is Practiced (The Four Satipaṭṭhānas)
The primary method for developing sati is outlined in the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta (The Discourse on the Establishing of Mindfulness), which instructs practitioners to maintain continuous awareness across four domains: [1, 2, 3, 4]
Mindfulness of the Body (Kāya): Awareness of the breath, physical postures (walking, sitting, standing), and bodily sensations.
Mindfulness of Feelings (Vedanā): Noting whether experiences feel pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral as they arise.
Mindfulness of the Mind (Citta): Observing the current state of the mind (e.g., whether it is anxious, calm, distracted, or concentrated).
Mindfulness of Mental Realities (Dhammas): Observing how psychological patterns and Buddhist truths—like impermanence—operate within your direct experience. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
To help narrow this down, are you interested in how to practice mindfulness meditation, its connection to the Four Noble Truths, or how it differs from modern secular mindfulness?
Essentia Foundation Jan 23, 2026 Our follow-up with CPU inventor Federico Faggin on • Quantum Information Panpsychism Explained … sponsored by Consensus AI: the AI powered science search engine with access to 220+ million studies. Click: https://get.consensus.app/essentia for a free trial of Consensus Pro and 30% discount on a yearly plan (offer until 3-31-26) In this conversation with Hans Busstra, the legendary CPU inventor explains his quantum theory of consciousness in more detail and outlines some of his novel ideas, to be presented in his upcoming new book. He discusses, for instance, how we should regard our material universe: “spacetime and matter are the permanent memory of the experience of the self knowing of One.” For a scientific elaboration of Federico’s theory, see: “Hard Problem and Free Will: an information-theoretical approach,” Giacomo Mauro D’Ariano and Federico Faggin: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2012.06580 Federico’s book “Irreducible: Consciousness, Life, Computers, and Human Nature”: https://www.collectiveinkbooks.com/es…
Introduction 4:31 Who are we truly as humans? 5:52 Why do we often feel separated? 7:35 Is the ego part of the ‘Seity’, the conscious field that we are? 8:31 Spacetime as One that knows itself… 9:55 Federico’s cosmology in contrast to the Big Bang story 15:37 John Wheeler’s participatory universe, and consciousness in relationship to our material universe 18:51 Why Einstein couldn’t make the leap to accept quantum reality 20:04 Quantum collapse as a free will decision of quantum fields 20:50 Hans gives a recap of his understanding of the drone metaphor 25:22 Where is the self-knowing of One coming from? 27:13 The first time that One knows itself 28:09 The identity of a Seity 28:42 Self-knowing as the true Big Bang 31:43 Any new knowing is a creation 33:37 Federico’s view on body, mind, and spirit 33:57 How to distinguish between mind and spirit? 36:15 Spacetime as the overlap between spirit and body 37:29 There is no past 40:11 Think of our shareable reality as the display of a quantum computer 41:24 Federico’s hypothesis of what dark matter is 43:07 About our materialist bias 44:33 How can we explain life as randomness? 45:51 To what extent do you need a transcendent experience? 47:42 On the object/subject divide people think they can uphold 50:49 Has your experience of oneness become a place you can revisit? 52:07 What is your response to people saying mystics and gurus already knew all of this? 52:47 About our sponsor: Consensus AI 56:35 The rubber hand experiment 59:39 What mechanism could be at play in out-of-body experiences (OBEs)? 1:02:11 On the ethical implications of Federico’s theory 1:03:26 On spirituality vs religion 1:04:58 There is no ontological evil 1:06:41 How this theory has affected Federico’s own life 1:08:30 Is everything ‘meant to be’? 1:12:10 Our incarnation as an equation simulated under different conditions 1:14:05 Federico’s thought compared to Christianity 1:17:48 On the dangers of AI 1:18:50 Why conscious AI is a fantasy 1:22:40 AI is not the beginning of a new era, but it marks the beginning of one 1:24:10 Federico’s hopes and fears 1:25:09 What is happiness? 1:27:37 How to discern when we take spiritual experiences more seriously 1:31:46 The help Federico sought after his own transformative experience 1:33:07 The hide and seek of the universe Ethics statement: Essentia Foundation accepts sponsorships to help us create more and better content but is editorially completely independent and not affiliated with its sponsors. We only accept sponsorships that are compatible with our mission and scientific standards.
At a party given by a billionaire on Shelter Island, the late Kurt Vonnegut informs his pal, the author Joseph Heller (author of Catch 22), that their host, a hedge fund manager, had made more money in a single day than Heller had earned from his wildly popular novel Catch 22 over its whole history. Heller responds, “Yes, but I have something he will never have . . .Enough.”
Attributed to John C Bogle (1929 – 2019) American Investor, Founder of Vanguard
AN OPPORTUNITY FOR DAILY REFLECTION BROUGHT TO YOU BY THE SCHOOL OF PRACTICAL PHILOSOPHY
Scientists are exploring new algorithms, hardware and computing methods to lower AI’s power demands. Strategic siting of datacenters and other steps to increase green energy use are also key.
Support sound science and smart stories Help us make scientific knowledge accessible to all Donate today
As I sip coffee in my Berlin apartment and fire a question at Google’s AI chatbot Gemini, it’s easy not to think about the energy it takes to generate a response. Once the signal reaches my router, it whizzes, I assume, through copper wires or fiber-optic cables to one of Google’s data center hubs. Somewhere inside the data center’s labyrinthine halls of stacked processors, my query gets converted into numbers and undergoes billions of computations to determine context and meaning. The answer, once assembled, races back, in the blink of an eye.
Data centers — the beating hearts of the internet, powering everything from email to web searches — have existed for decades, but with the growing popularity of AI to generate text, images and video, they’re using more energy than ever. According to Google’s own estimates, processing a median-length text prompt with its AI assistant Gemini consumes around 0.24 watt-hours.
These amounts, individually small — 0.24 watt-hours is equivalent to watching TV for about nine seconds — are adding up fast. In March 2026, OpenAI estimated that more than 900 million people use its AI chatbot, ChatGPT, every week, tallying billions of queries daily.
Data centers have existed for decades, powering everything from email to web searches. But now, in the age of AI, they’re rapidly expanding.CREDIT: ISTOCK.COM / ED LALLO
The exact amount of electricity consumed by data centers, globally or in the United States, which hosts more than any other nation, isn’t publicly reported by all tech companies, says Eric Masanet of the University of California, Santa Barbara, who researches data center sustainability. But according to the most recent estimates by the International Energy Agency, US data centers guzzled some 224 terawatt-hours of electricity in 2025 — more than 5 percent of the country’s electricity use. That’s a significant uptick from an estimated 1.9 percent consumed in 2018, well before the mainstream surge of generative AI.
This electricity use seems set to soar. In the race to secure market leadership for generative AI products, companies like Google, Meta, Amazon, OpenAI, Anthropic, Microsoft and Oracle are investing tens to hundreds of billions of dollars to build AI-focused data centers. Compared to data centers of the pre-AI days that consume, say, 100 megawatts of electricity — enough to power 83,000 homes with average demand — the newcomers are often “hyperscale” and can use a gigawatt or more, or roughly a tenth of the electrical capacity of Los Angeles.
Masanet and other experts have been alarmed to see much of this demand met by plants powered by fossil fuels, such as gas, whose burning releases planet-warming carbon dioxide. A key reason is that data centers are often constructed in places without abundant renewable energy sources like hydropower, geothermal, solar or wind.
Tech companies often offset emissions by investing in renewable energy elsewhere. But unless those clean energy plants make more energy than the data centers use, this strategy — at best — keeps CO2 emissions of centers in stasis rather than reducing them to a net of nothing, important for halting global warming. “For every megawatt for which we install fossil fuel power,” Masanet says, “it sets us back on our progress.”
And that’s not considering the resources spent on manufacturing the hardware that fills new data centers, or the impacts on communities living near them, which often suffer from air and noise pollution from gas plants and possible strain on local water resources, which are used to cool the data centers.
Many data centers in the US are concentrated in the Virginia area, according to a non-exhaustive database from the International Energy Agency.CREDIT: IEA / ENERGY AND AI OBSERVATORY 2025. CC BY 4.0
Although forecasts for AI’s energy impact remain devilishly tricky, especially since the size of payoffs from investments in AI are uncertain, it’s clear to experts that energy-saving strategies are urgently needed. Without them, according to one 2025 estimate, US data centers could soon be releasing the equivalent of 24 to 44 megatons of CO2 annually, the latter equivalent to the annual emissions of Norway.
And so computer scientists and engineers are rethinking some of the power-hungry hardware and software that fuel AI. They’re working to develop energy-saving algorithms and processor designs, and carefully considering where, and how, data centers are constructed.
“AI’s energy cost is not an accident: This is basically a product of how our systems are built,” says Fengqi You, an expert in energy systems at Cornell University. But with the right mix of solutions, he says, “we could really reshape the trajectory.”
The roots of AI’s energy problem
To comprehend AI’s energy cost, it helps to understand large language models (LLMs) — the lifeblood of AI text generation tools such as chatbots and AI assistants — specifically, ones based on a design described in 2017 by the machine-learning laboratory Google Brain. This design, transformer architecture, can process text at lightning speed by simultaneously taking each word and weighing its relationship to every other word it sees. It “learns” which words go together by computing how strongly each word relates to all other words in a text, examining each word in many contexts. (A similar design is used for AI image and video generators.)
On a computational level, this happens by converting words or word fragments into numbers and performing additions and multiplications between them. Key to the speed is being able to do these calculations in parallel, made possible by graphic processor units (GPUs) — mostly manufactured by the company NVIDIA — originally invented for rapid 3D rendering of imagery during gaming.
Manufacturers of the processing chips that fuel AI computations are working to make the chips more energy efficient; examples are the latest AI-specialized chips developed by NVIDIA.CREDIT: NVIDIA
The initial training of an LLM, required to learn all these relationships, consumes vast amounts of energy. Because each word it trains on must be weighed against all others in a given chunk of text, the number of computations the model performs — hence the energy required — increases quadratically relative to the length of text (i.e., doubling the length of text quadruples the number of computations). That adds up quickly given that most LLMs are trained on massive swaths of publicly available internet text. Some estimates suggest that training GPT-4 — the iteration of ChatGPT that launched in 2023 — guzzled between 50 and 60 gigawatt-hours of electricity, enough to power San Francisco for three to four days.
But experts are more worried about the energy costs of using the models to generate data once they’ve been trained, a process called inference. “You train once, then you inference for a billion people in the world,” says Mosharaf Chowdhury, an AI systems expert at the University of Michigan who has been measuring the electricity usage of a handful of large language models that have been made publicly available.
This process is surprisingly inefficient: Each time transformer models generate a word — by selecting the one with the highest probability of following the previous word, given context — they put the query and partially written answer through the model. In doing so, they apply all of the parameters they’ve calculated during training to understand language patterns — which number in the hundreds of billions or even trillions.
“The fact that you have to do a lot of calculations for a single word to be added — that’s a problematic thing,” says Günter Klambauer, an AI expert at Johannes Kepler University in Austria.
Tweaking AI software to save energy
This recognition has triggered interest in smaller language models specialized to specific tasks. These are trained more narrowly, have fewer parameters — say, tens or hundreds of millions — and perform substantially less computation than larger models. In one 2025 paper published by UNESCO, computer scientist Ivana Drobnjak of University College London and colleagues compared energy consumption of Meta’s language model Llama-3.1 with smaller AI models dedicated to particular tasks — ones called DistilBART and t5-small-xsum for summarization, and others for translation or answering questions. When used for their respective tasks, the smaller models consumed more than 90 percent less energy than Llama 3.1 on the same job.
And so computer scientists have been driven to build a similar kind of task specialization into LLMs themselves. In “mixture of expert” models, only particular parts of one big model are activated for certain tasks. These parts “learn to handle different patterns in language,” Drobnjak says.
This is thought to be one reason why R1, an LLM developed by the Chinese company DeepSeek, reportedly consumed significantly less energy than other models (independent experts have raised doubts about those figures). Udit Gupta, an expert in electrical and computer engineering at Cornell Tech, says that LLMs like Gemini or ChatGPT are similarly routing queries to more specialized sub-models. “There’s a lot of work being done on how to assess the complexity of the query or task that’s coming from users and then find the right model,” Gupta says. (While Google spokesperson Ralf Bremer notes that the 0.24 watt-hours currently spent on processing median-length Gemini prompts is already 33 times more efficient than it was back in 2024, some experts suspect that processing queries with an LLM still consumes more energy than an equivalent web search.)
Scientists are also exploring different kinds of LLMs, to break what Klambauer calls the “quadratic curse” of transformer models.
One alternative, called a long short-term memory (LSTM) model, gets around this alarming energy increase by temporarily storing a kind of summary of the prompt that was inputted by the user plus the text generated so far, akin to recalling important plot points instead of an entire movie. That way, it only has to process the summary, rather than all the words in the full text to date, every time it generates a new word. This prevents LSTM’s energy costs from skyrocketing as it responds to a query — using about 50 percent less energy than transformer-type models to process texts of around 8,000 words in length, Klambauer says.
LSTM models were developed in the 1990s but were abandoned because transformers could be trained much faster. But Klambauer says that recent advances have improved the performance of LSTM, now called xLSTM. He’s working with the Austrian startup NXAI to further develop and optimize xLSTM, “because we think it’s worth it for energy efficiency,” he says.
But major tech companies have invested so many years and resources into developing transformer-based models that switching to other models would be costly, says Wolfgang Maaß, an AI and business informatics researcher at the German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence. “We have to see whether this becomes as dominant, or whether it finds a niche in the whole market.”
Stay in the Know Sign up for the Knowable Magazine newsletter today
Computing with wafers and light
Though experts say the fastest energy savings will come from software tweaks, some are also taking aim at the energy-hungry processing chips that fuel AI computations. Engineers have made chips increasingly efficient over time by packing more computing capacity into individual processors — reducing the energy required to shuttle data between chips that are working together to perform AI computations. Engineers have done this by shrinking the size of transistors — microscopic electrical switches that process data — inside the chips.
But because engineers are reaching the physical limits of how small transistors can be, “we need to think of alternate ideas to improve the designs,” says computer architect Ajay Joshi of the Boston University Photonics Center.
One strategy is to make the chips larger. Dinner-plate-sized “wafer-scale chips” can pack nearly 70 times as many transistors as a single, postage-stamp-sized GPU and consume 143 times less electricity for communication than comparable GPUs, says computer engineer Rakesh Kumar of the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. Commercially produced by the California company Cerebras, wafer-scale chips have drawbacks, including a greater risk of damage during manufacturing. But because of their energy-saving and other beneficial features, “they would be very attractive to many hyperscalers and AI companies,” Kumar says.
One strategy to make processors more efficient is to make them larger so they can contain more transistors, the building blocks of computers. “Wafer scale” chips, such as those developed by California-based manufacturer Cerebras, reduce the energy spent on shuttling information between individual chips.CREDIT: CEREBRAS SYSTEMS
Many tech companies have improved energy efficiency by fashioning their own processors that are tailor-made for AI computations — such as Amazon Web Service’s Trainium2 chip or Google’s Ironwood Tensor Processing Units — according to statements from those companies. As for NVIDIA, the company’s head of sustainability Josh Parker says its AI-specialized GPUs have come a long way from the ones used for gaming and are now designed to run AI tasks as efficiently as possible; other innovations, such as making the interconnections between GPUs more efficient, have also helped. “Over the past eight years, NVIDIA GPUs have improved 45,000 [times] in energy efficiency for large language model workloads,” he says.
Engineers are also exploring alternative computing methods. Conventional AI processors calculate by encoding numbers in a binary system of ones and zeros, which is achieved by turning transistors on and off (representing the number 5, for instance, requires four transistors to represent the code 0101). But transistors can do more than function as binary switches allowing electron flow or not; they can also work as analog dials and hold intermediate voltages representing different numbers. That requires fewer transistors, and less energy, for computations. “People have known for decades that doing certain things in analog … can be a lot more energy efficient,” Kumar says.
For example, electrical engineer Paul Manea of the German research institute Forschungszentrum Jülich and colleagues are working to develop devices called “gain cells” that are full of transistors working this way. Importantly, gain cells can both store the data required to process a query, and compute the answer. That overcomes another big energy bottleneck of conventional computing systems, where memory storage and computation occur on separate pieces of hardware.
That’s especially problematic for transformer-based LLMs, because each time they generate a word, they must shuttle the query and partially written answer from memory to a processor. Manea and colleagues estimate that gain cells in lieu of traditional GPUs can reduce the energy guzzled by one of the most energy-consuming parts of transformer-based LLMs by four orders of magnitude. But it will take more refining before they can be more widely used, Manea says.
The notion of devices that both store and compute information is a key idea of “neuromorphic” computing, an up-and-coming field of computer engineering inspired by the human brain, which consumes orders of magnitude less energy than computers. Another brain-inspired invention is chips that encode information not in continuous data streams but — like human nerve cells — in the timing of voltage “spikes” propagating through the system. Allowing components to rest until they’re needed “could potentially translate to less energy,” says Eleni Vasilaki, an expert in bioinspired machine learning at the University of Sheffield in England.
Maaß, for example, is part of a team that received roughly $5.8 million from the German government to test neuromorphic chips, among other strategies, to reduce the energy required for AI models. Some brain-inspired chips are already commercially available, but the technology is still far from being attractive for mainstream computing, says nanoelectronics expert Tony Kenyon of University College London, whose team recently received $17 million from the UK government to develop neuromorphic computing.
Other scientists are developing chips that process information not with electrons but through the interaction of photons — particles of light — with matter (fiber-optic cables, which encode and transmit data as light pulses, are used around the world). With photons, more information can be transmitted at the same time, and signals can be altered much faster, says Elena Goi, a photonic computing researcher at Friedrich Schiller University Jena in Germany.
Even without reinventing how computers work, much can be done to reduce AI’s impact not just on energy but also on water resources used for cooling data centers. Importantly, tech companies should reconsider where they build those centers, says energy systems expert You. Right now, existing US ones are concentrated in northern Virginia, which has limited water resources and renewable energy capacity compared with the Midwest, for instance. You recently estimated that better siting — along with energy-efficient hardware and software — could reduce future carbon and water footprints of US data centers by 73 percent and 86 percent, respectively.
Data centers —and the gas plants often built to power them — can cause air and noise pollution and add further strain on local water resources, leading many communities to oppose their construction.CREDIT: SARA DIGGINS / THE AUSTIN AMERICAN-STATESMAN VIA GETTY IMAGES
Masanet adds that tech companies already with data centers across the country could at least train their models in strategic places. “Some companies like Google have been doing this: They shift their loads to follow renewables,” he says. They also should address the electricity and resources spent on manufacturing processors for new data centers, as well as electronic waste as outdated tech is replaced every few years, he adds.
Minimizing e-waste by using hardware for longer periods and recovering old electronics is one of Amazon’s sustainability strategies, according to a statement to Knowable Magazine; so is designing data centers in energy- and water-saving ways and investing in a slew of renewable and nuclear energy projects. “We’ll continue to implement solutions that benefit our customers and the communities we operate in,” says Brandon Oyer, Amazon Web Services’ head of energy and water in the Americas.
Meanwhile, a press representative at Microsoft points to a number of sustainability initiatives the company has taken, including new cooling technologies, renewable energy investments and waste reduction. Google spokesperson Ralf Bremer emphasized the company’s goal of reaching net-zero emissions across its operations by 2030 and replenishing 120 percent of the fresh water consumed by its offices and data centers by 2030. An OpenAI representative points to a press release outlining efforts to minimize water use and plans for solar energy generation at one of its campuses. Anthropic, Meta and Oracle did not respond to requests for comment by deadline.
Though tech companies are taking sustainability into consideration, their main objective is to rapidly build out data center capacity, says computer engineer Benjamin Lee of the University of Pennsylvania. He predicts that, eventually, they’ll need to step up efforts to improve energy efficiency to reduce costs. Governments should help to accelerate this shift, Masanet says. So far, he and his team have counted nearly 220 policies introduced to address data center sustainability at the US state level, 18 at the federal level, and more from other countries, though not all were ultimately adopted.
“It’s clear that governments around the world are beginning to take action,” he says. However, he adds, “we also see some state and local governments with proposed policies that mostly aim to incentivize and accelerate data center builds.”
The Industrial Sustainability Analysis Laboratory at the University of California, Santa Barbara has been tracking state and federal policies related to data centers. The vast majority of these policies relate to data center sustainability in some way, although they also include some tax incentives. This dataset may not be exhaustive.
AI’s energy cost will ultimately be a balancing act: Will it save more resources through its problem-solving abilities deployed toward everything from finding cancer cures to improving logistics, than it demands? But though building a more frugal, energy-saving AI is important, so is carefully considering where AI is needed, Kenyon says. Is the world truly a better place, for example, with nonhuman “AI agents” providing customer support?
“I think it’s a common mistake, when a new technology comes in, to suddenly think, ‘Well, everything has to adopt that new technology,’” he says. “That approach really isn’t doing us any favors.”
Katarina Zimmer is a science and environment journalist based in Germany. She is a special contributor to Knowable Magazine, where she covers the energy transition and planetary health. Her other work is published in National Geographic, Scientific American, BBC Future and elsewhere. Check out more of her work at www.katarinazimmer.com.
Consciousness, spirituality, biography, sexuality, androgyny, futurism, space, the arts, science, astrology, democracy, humor, books, movies and more