1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Yes, obviously AI is emitting way too much. It shouldn't even be producing 0.2% of global emissions, let alone 2%. My main grievance is that no one ever talks about improving industrial and agricultural processes even though they produce around 29% of emissions and 20% of emissions respectively.
Anaerobic bacteria produce methane. When oxygen is present, the aerobic pathway outcompetes anaerobic because more energy is available, producing CO2 instead.
GHG are usually measured in tonnes of CO2 equivalent (GWP) where methane is about 80x as much warming as the same mass of CO2 over a 20 year period, or about 25x as much warming over a 100 year period.
This is also what's going on in the steady replacement of various refrigerants with lower-GWP alternatives.
How is CO2 equivalent measured based on altitude and since methane will eventually degrade to CO2
Lots and lots of math and analysis.
My understanding is it is fairly well settled on a chemical & lifespan basis. I am not sure of what impact initial altitude has.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_potential
So it's an educated guess that has lots of flaws just like I said. GHG emissions comparisons between output methods is ridiculous. Because again, water is a GHG emission.
So your alternative is what? Just say a tonne is a tonne?
It's adequate for the purpose at hand.
Not group up all emissions and compare them for the sake of clicks. Look at the original post, where agriculture and livestock are being set as significantly worse than AI data center emissions in 2021. These two aren't really to be compared, they're both problems and need solutions but it's not a pie chart, you don't have to pick a slice and not the other.
It's not adequate, it is a tool for shit clickbait articles, memes, and discourse when the actual problem is GHG production slowed/stopped as efficiently as possible. Banning private jets for instance is fairly easy to do, it has no massive drawbacks other than the rich people being upset. Not building more datacenters for a while, not really difficult, adding infrastructure is the hard part not pausing more. As opposed to this worthless "NOOOO AGRICULTURE IS WORSE THAN AI BECAUSE MY ONE GRAPH WITH MISLEADING DATA"