zlacker

Sam Altman Says AI Using Too Much Energy Will Require Breakthrough Energy Source

submitted by Dyslex+(OP) on 2024-01-22 21:30:07 | 38 points 83 comments
[view article] [source] [go to bottom]

NOTE: showing posts with links only show all posts
◧◩
22. julien+dm[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-22 23:36:03
>>jacque+Ql
Well actually: "In a twist, Microsoft is experimenting with generative artificial intelligence to see if AI could help streamline the [nuclear power] approval process, according to Microsoft executives." [0]

[0] https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/microsoft-targets-nuclear-to-pow...

23. boulos+nm[view] [source] 2024-01-22 23:37:13
>>Dyslex+(OP)
It's unfortunate that no math is ever done in these stories.

If you take the "350,000" H100s that Facebook wants by EOY, each of those can do 700W, which gives you almost 250 MW for just the GPUs. That sounds like a lot, until you realize that a single large power plant is measured in Gigawatts. All of Google's data centers combined are O(10 GW) which are matched with renewable power offsets [1].

Importantly, the world installed >500 Gigawatts of renewable energy in 2023 [2], mostly driven by PV Solar in China. The amount of potential solar and wind and other renewable-ish (hydro) outstrips even a 10x'ing of a lot of these numbers. But even for a single site, dams like Three Gorges are >20 GW.

There are real efficiency and scale challenges in doing AI in a single, large site. But existing power generation systems deliver plenty of power.

[1] https://www.gstatic.com/gumdrop/sustainability/google-2023-e...

[2] https://www.iea.org/reports/renewables-2023/executive-summar...

◧◩
26. dexwiz+wm[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-22 23:37:58
>>nekoas+oj
Amazon is a huge investor in green energy, both solar and wind. Google also buys solar. Colocated energy is great in theory, but doesn't always scale. That is why most companies take an offset approach.

https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/sustainability/amazon-renew...

41. karim7+So[view] [source] 2024-01-22 23:53:07
>>Dyslex+(OP)
What kind of 'AI' is he talking about? The AGI kind? The Superintelligence kind? The chatbot which can't easily be ridiculed using esoteric word incantations kind?

I want one which can instantly calculate numberwang[0] and get it right every time

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ofnDdi-vfw

◧◩◪
49. boulos+zr[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-23 00:08:47
>>nategl+cp
https://www.publicpower.org/system/files/documents/Americas_... via https://www.publicpower.org/resource/americas-electricity-ge... disagrees with you even in the last decade. And the future seems mostly solar:

> This report also analyzes prospective generation capacity in four categories — under construction, permitted, application pending, and proposed. More than 466,000 MW of new generation capacity is under development in the United States — a 13% increase over 2022. Sixty-one percent of capacity most likely to come online, permitted plants and plants that are under construction, are in solar.

China's growth in power capacity is non-trivially due to increasing demand. If the US or Europe or wherever suddenly wanted to build XXX GW per year, they could (modulo bureaucracy, which is very real).

◧◩◪◨
62. xnx+wD[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-23 01:21:26
>>pclmul+Nz
Oh, wow. I didn't know it was that bad. Google advertises a PUE of 1.1: https://www.google.com/about/datacenters/efficiency/
◧◩◪◨
64. nategl+9G[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-23 01:36:15
>>boulos+zr
I mispoke about capacity, but adding nameplace capacity hasn't increased the total energy generated, we've been sitting around 4T kWh for a while: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/electricity-...

The US or EU could likely do it, yes. If someone is willing to put up the capital to do it. The point of Sam Altman's statement is that he wants someone to do it.

[go to top]