Taking climate change seriously means offsetting your AI footprint – Scott Lane

We’ve missed the 1.5°C climate target, says the UN’s Secretary-General. Devastating consequences are now “inevitable” (The Guardian). 

When it comes to the climate debate, there’s been a fixation on prevention, as governments and businesses scramble to make up for decades of damage. But the reality is that we must now begin to adapt to the consequences of a warming climate.

Effective global adaptation to climate change hinges on ensuring all nations have the capacity to respond – to build climate resilience, whilst warding off further damage to the climate. 

Yet while AI can accelerate climate action, it also contributes to the problem. Training and running large models consumes vast amounts of energy, and global AI-related water use is projected to reach up to 6.6 billion cubic meters by 2027 (Li, Peng et al).

At the same time, it also risks entrenching a pre-existing divide: the gulf between higher- and lower-income nations. Ownership of the most powerful AI models rests with wealthy nations and Big Tech firms – leaving them better positioned to harness AI’s benefits. 

Ironic, given that it’s lower-income countries that face the brunt of climate change. 

Developing countries need more than just access to AI. They need people who can use it. Regional AI labs and local training programmes would help nations create their own climate solutions. 

And it shouldn’t be governments and non-profits that foot the bill. It should be the private sector: the AI developers, chipmakers, and large-scale users. It should be embedded in corporate ESG strategies. 

Think of it as a way to offset the environmental impact of their own AI use. Just as businesses purchase carbon credits and plant trees, private-sector firms should embed funding for AI initiatives in developing countries into their sustainability strategies. 

While Big Tech and AI developers bear the greatest responsibility, every business using AI has a role to play. Offsetting AI’s impact isn’t just good ethics. It’s good business. It signals to consumers and investors alike that you understand the cost of innovation – and you’re willing to take accountability for it.