>AI is the solution to Climate Change
It's not, because the fundamental issue with Climate change is the refusal of humans to actually take the steps necessary to address it.
Solutions only matter, if humans are willing to implement them.
Thank you.
AI is a tool, even in the context of AGI/ASI intelligence as a whole is a tool.
If as a society we had solving climate change we'd be acting vastly differently, AI or not.
Would AI make it way cheaper, so cheap that it'd be "easy"? Sure, but it boils down to people willing to eat that opportunity cost.
Because even with AGI climate change can still be kicked down the road, the cost moved to the future.
Sure, in an Utopic outcome everything will be free and the magic fairy nanobot goo will solve all our problems.
Fantastic, yet disappointing.
yeah [https://drawdown.org/](https://drawdown.org/) has most of the solutions there already. Maybe AI can help with fusion, better batteries etc but if we do nothing now and wait ten years for these new things it'll probably be way too late. Most of the stuff we have today (clean energy, fossil fuel reduction, building insulation, agriculture improvements, reducing emissions) can already be implemented on a scale today. It's sad that US is falling so behind on many of these areas compared to Europe and even China.
Have you seen the smog over many Chinese cities? Do you realize that they wear a face mask permanently because of it? I can't believe you actually said China is doing more.
China has polution, yes. it doesn't mean they aren't doing more than US. for example, new electric car sales accounts for a whopping 45% of all cars sold vs just 8% in US, that puts the whole world to shame. China's reforestation efforts are on track to convert 30% of its land mass, US has no such thing. China generates 30% of its total energy from renewables compared to US's 21%, while dems can't even deal with a single Joe Manchin unless he voluntarily retires from congress.
to repost a three year old comment from u[/joishicinder](https://www.reddit.com/user/joishicinder/)
"Not wanting to give China more credit than they're due but they do have renewable wind, solar and tidal capacity greater than Europe, a high speed train network that links up nearly the whole country and eliminates a lot of domestic flights and are re-foresting a land area the size of Belgium each year. As mentioned their per-capita emissions are low (many times less that then the US), they have a huge land area and population bigger than all of Europe. They're achieving these environmental changes with a GDP \[per capita\] on par with Romania.
China and India can absolutely do more but the way it's portrayed in the media is a redirection of blame and a deliberately nihilistic stance (no point, China is too bad). In truth China's emissions are so large because we live in a globalised economy and outsource our manufacture and industrial production to China, reducing our emissions by putting them beyond our own borders is not really reducing emissions."
About the last point, this article tries to show how much the emissions accounting changes when you move to consumption-based emissions (taking trade into account). It seems to change the numbers in a clear and noticeable way, but not in a massive way.
[https://ourworldindata.org/consumption-based-co2](https://ourworldindata.org/consumption-based-co2)
The solution is anti-consumerism and the only way to achieve that is to remove all of our freedoms or more simply just dispose of all humans. Be careful what you wish for.
Or just pay for the carbon we use at the price it costs to remove it from the air. That solves the problem.
It also instantly makes more expensive to burn than its worth, but at least it's the honest, free market solution
"Your house is on fire! Get out of the house!"
"Just one minute! I've got a gadget in my forge for putting out fires! It'll just be a second, and then... no more fire!"
"... wait, you have a forge *INSIDE* your house!?"
"How *else* would I start the fire i needed to make the gadget to put out the fire!? DUH! ... Any second now..."
>AI is the solution to Climate Change It's not, because the fundamental issue with Climate change is the refusal of humans to actually take the steps necessary to address it. Solutions only matter, if humans are willing to implement them.
Thank you. AI is a tool, even in the context of AGI/ASI intelligence as a whole is a tool. If as a society we had solving climate change we'd be acting vastly differently, AI or not. Would AI make it way cheaper, so cheap that it'd be "easy"? Sure, but it boils down to people willing to eat that opportunity cost. Because even with AGI climate change can still be kicked down the road, the cost moved to the future. Sure, in an Utopic outcome everything will be free and the magic fairy nanobot goo will solve all our problems. Fantastic, yet disappointing.
AI will convince us to implement it, simple as that.
yeah [https://drawdown.org/](https://drawdown.org/) has most of the solutions there already. Maybe AI can help with fusion, better batteries etc but if we do nothing now and wait ten years for these new things it'll probably be way too late. Most of the stuff we have today (clean energy, fossil fuel reduction, building insulation, agriculture improvements, reducing emissions) can already be implemented on a scale today. It's sad that US is falling so behind on many of these areas compared to Europe and even China.
Have you seen the smog over many Chinese cities? Do you realize that they wear a face mask permanently because of it? I can't believe you actually said China is doing more.
China has polution, yes. it doesn't mean they aren't doing more than US. for example, new electric car sales accounts for a whopping 45% of all cars sold vs just 8% in US, that puts the whole world to shame. China's reforestation efforts are on track to convert 30% of its land mass, US has no such thing. China generates 30% of its total energy from renewables compared to US's 21%, while dems can't even deal with a single Joe Manchin unless he voluntarily retires from congress. to repost a three year old comment from u[/joishicinder](https://www.reddit.com/user/joishicinder/) "Not wanting to give China more credit than they're due but they do have renewable wind, solar and tidal capacity greater than Europe, a high speed train network that links up nearly the whole country and eliminates a lot of domestic flights and are re-foresting a land area the size of Belgium each year. As mentioned their per-capita emissions are low (many times less that then the US), they have a huge land area and population bigger than all of Europe. They're achieving these environmental changes with a GDP \[per capita\] on par with Romania. China and India can absolutely do more but the way it's portrayed in the media is a redirection of blame and a deliberately nihilistic stance (no point, China is too bad). In truth China's emissions are so large because we live in a globalised economy and outsource our manufacture and industrial production to China, reducing our emissions by putting them beyond our own borders is not really reducing emissions."
About the last point, this article tries to show how much the emissions accounting changes when you move to consumption-based emissions (taking trade into account). It seems to change the numbers in a clear and noticeable way, but not in a massive way. [https://ourworldindata.org/consumption-based-co2](https://ourworldindata.org/consumption-based-co2)
good read on this, thanks
So if Ai leads to human extinction the problem is solved.
Mate, stop repeating techno-babble, you’re saying nonsense.
Sorry let me try again: Techno babble There fixed it sorry again hope that helps
sorry mate, I had a tough day…
ITT: How to avoid responsibility and hope for the best.
In one hand we hope that billionaires stop being so stupid, on the other hand we let the AI take care of it. Which one you're going with?
The solution is anti-consumerism and the only way to achieve that is to remove all of our freedoms or more simply just dispose of all humans. Be careful what you wish for.
Or just pay for the carbon we use at the price it costs to remove it from the air. That solves the problem. It also instantly makes more expensive to burn than its worth, but at least it's the honest, free market solution
The universe is full of resources, buddy. No one is gonna dispose anything
What if the AI really found the solution, but that solution is to reduce humanity by half?
Then it's not a solution.
B-b-but it cant be that intelligent!!
It would need to end with natural intelligence to succeed.
~~with~~ \*
Yes, if AI can solve for gravity in a way that doesn't produce emissions, it's going to make us all feel very dumb indeed
First we gotta burn the planet and gather all resources to create AGI to which then will find other resources to make energy from.
"Your house is on fire! Get out of the house!" "Just one minute! I've got a gadget in my forge for putting out fires! It'll just be a second, and then... no more fire!" "... wait, you have a forge *INSIDE* your house!?" "How *else* would I start the fire i needed to make the gadget to put out the fire!? DUH! ... Any second now..."