Why your AI questions are a power and water drain
Gordon Noble: Yeah, that's right. And I think this is crept up on us. When you do a search now with all these AI tools, ChatGPT being one of them, they can be 10 times more energy consuming than, for instance, doing a Google search. And what sits behind that is this massive investment that we've seen in data centres globally. So it's absolutely exploded.
Sam Hawley: Yeah, okay. So we're not thinking about these data centres when we're typing in what we want to know from ChatGPT. And most of us would never have seen one or been in one. What do they look like? Where are they?
Gordon Noble: Yeah, it's a really good question. So data centres, just to put it in visual terms, so the average size of what they call these hyperscale data centres, so they're around about 10,000 square feet. To give you an indication, a Bunnings store is about 8,000 square feet. So they're kind of just big sheds, right? Huge. But what we're seeing now is that we're moving to not just these Bunnings-like sheds, if you like, but we're moving to these massive million square data centres, almost campuses of data centres. Around the world, there are around about 1,100 of these hyperscale data centres. In Sydney, for instance, Sydney is a big centre for data centres here in Australia. We have over 85 data centres. One of the reasons Sydney is such an attractive place for data centres is we have 12 submarine cables that come out of Sydney and basically connect us to the rest of the world. So data centres globally are now around about 1.5% of global energy consumption. The question is what's going to happen in the future?
Sam Hawley: Okay, so Gordon, let's delve a bit further into how these data centres actually work, because while they're enabling us to inform ourselves at lightning speed, they're also using a huge amount of power, massive amount.
Gordon Noble: So roughly at the moment, global energy consumption coming out of data centres is around 1.5% of all the global electricity. The issue is that data centres are highly concentrated. So it's in places in the world, the US, parts of Europe, Ireland is a massive data centre hub, where they're actually causing strain on the energy grid because of how much the energy growth has been. So to give you an idea in Australia, so a research report from Morgan and Stanley, they were projecting that roughly at the moment, data centre energy consumption from the grid is around about 5% of all of our energy consumption. But what they're projecting is that this could grow to between 8% and 15% of all of our electricity consumption here in Australia, depending on some of the decisions that are made as in how much we use AI tools. So what the International Energy Agency is now saying is that by 2030, the energy consumption from data centres will be the size of Japan. So we're talking massive amounts of increase in energy consumption. That's placing strains on the grid, but it's also placing a shift in terms of how the energies come from. So for instance, in the US, we're seeing providers like Microsoft, who are big data centre operators because of the tools that they've got. They're looking to shift to nuclear. And one of the things they're looking to do is to reopen Three Mile Island, which is the nuclear plant that had been mothballed to basically take all that energy from a reopened Three Mile Island. So lots and lots of decisions as a result of this.
Sam Hawley: Why is it, Gordon, that AI takes so much more energy than just Googling?
Gordon Noble: These large language models are effectively trained to look at the whole of the internet, right? So when they're developing these models, they're actually looking at everything in the internet. And then when we ask it to do something, it's churning away from all that work that it's done. Lots and lots of different applications, but I think that common common thread is that it's aggregating across a lot of data rather than just that single data search where it goes to a single source.
Sam Hawley: Do we have a sense already about the sort of strain that it's putting on electricity grids in Australia?
Gordon Noble: Yeah, so at the moment, that's one of the questions. And we don't really have, I think, a good picture of the national demand, right? So the issue at the moment is a lot of the training of these AI tools, they've taken place in the US principally. So they haven't yet really been here in Australia. So that's going to be one of the questions as we increase the size of our data centre industry. Where is it going to start to have implications in terms of energy demand? Will it be, for instance, in Sydney, which is really our data centre capital? What would the impact, if you like, in terms of energy consumption in New South Wales in particular? Other states have the same issue, but because Sydney really is that capital of data centres in Australia, that's where some of the key issues will emerge.
Sam Hawley: And Gordon, every time we use an AI site like ChatGPT, it uses a lot of water, doesn't it?
Gordon Noble: Yeah, look, this is a real sleeper issue, and it's one that we're very concerned with. There's recent research, for instance, that since 2022, all the new data centres that have been developed, you know, two thirds of them are in areas where there's water stress. So it's becoming a big issue. But the way to think about data centres is that they're like the human body, they like to be kept cool, operate efficiently. And one of the ways that that happens is using water. So they consume literally billions of litres of water. The issue as we go forward is how do we actually, in Australia, build a data centre industry that is sustainable, given that we're an arid continent, given that we're going to have challenges from our climate in terms of water. At the moment, one of the opportunities is that both in Sydney and Melbourne, where data centres are going to likely be established, is we actually have surplus water in the form of recycled water. We tip 97% of our recycled water out in Sydney and Melbourne, we actually tip it out into our oceans and bays. So this is an asset, for instance, that could be used if we're smart enough to say, well, how can we actually build, say pipelines of recycled water to use this water, so we're not actually putting stress, environmental stress, on our rivers and creeks and streams, etc. So there's opportunities around this that we could solve.
Sam Hawley: This is all making me start to feel rather bad for using ChatGPT for that recipe last night. I must go back to the old book, the cookbook lives on. Anyway, just tell me about emissions then, because we're meant to be bringing them down and I'm gathering this is not helping. Even the tech companies admit that, don't they?
Gordon Noble: Yeah, this is what happened last year. So I think the surprise to the market is we started having the sustainability reports of the big tech companies and they all started to actually reveal how much their emissions had started to increase over the last four or five years. Each one of them, there are different increases in emissions depending on the way they've structured their operations, whether they build data centres, whether they outsource them, etc. But the picture that was emerging was a very consistent increase in their energy consumption. I think that really woke up a lot of the market in terms of, yeah, this is actually an energy intensive industry. Up until at that time, I think there was a little bit of a lack of understanding of how much energy data centres were creating because it wasn't really being aggregated in a single spot. So as we've been getting what we call these climate related financial disclosures and companies are starting to report on what we call the scope one, two and three emissions, we're starting to get a bigger picture. We're expecting to get more reporting in the next month or so. So what we'll start to see is what's happened since 2024 and 2025 and then we'll start to really have a good understanding of where things go forward. But what the clear picture at the moment is emissions arising in the big tech companies driven by their investments in AI.
Sam Hawley: Gosh, all right. So Gordon, how worried do you think we should be then about this massive energy use and who should actually be taking responsibility for this?
Gordon Noble: You know, I think it's as you mentioned, there's a lot of potential benefits around AI tools. You know, we can use these, for instance, for whether it's the recipe, a lot of environmental applications, a lot of benefits here if we get this right. At the moment from an Australian perspective, what really we haven't seen is a national approach being taken on this. We have, I think, in the Australian government an approach to communications that goes back to the, you know, the days in the early Federation we had a postmaster general. At the moment we need to start to think of, you know, the digital economy as actually moving across a range of different portfolios in the federal government, for instance. So we need a strategy around this to recognise that this has potentially got massive benefits, but also we really need to manage that. What we're seeing in other jurisdictions, for instance, Singapore, have gone down the pathway of establishing a green data centre roadmap. We need something like that in Australia.
Sam Hawley: But what do you think without a new approach, can we keep pumping these questions into ChatGPT and still reach our environmental goals? And can our energy system actually cope with demand that is just going to keep growing?
Gordon Noble: This is the big question. So the reality is if we do have at the higher end of expectations of the growth of AI, the energy that's demanded here just in Australia will actually crowd out other investments that we're making in renewable energy. So whilst we're making progress in decarbonising our grid, you know, there's an assumption that's based on, you know, a certain level of growth of energy demand. If that increases significantly, you start to put pressure on how much we can actually invest in more renewables, in more solar, for instance, more battery technology. It starts to then have that question, do we keep coal-fired power stations longer than we need? So I think there's a broader set of issues that we really need to get our heads around.
Sam Hawley: Gordon Noble is a Research Director with the Institute for Sustainable Futures at the University of Technology, Sydney. This episode was produced by Sydney Pead and Adair Sheppard. Audio production by Cinnamon Nippard. Our supervising producer is David Coady. I'm Sam Hawley. I'm going to take some leave from now for a couple of weeks. Sydney Pead will be with you from tomorrow. Thanks for listening.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

ABC News
3 minutes ago
- ABC News
Queensland government strikes new deal with Bravus to defer royalties, expand Carmichael coal mine
The Queensland government has struck a new royalty deferral deal with the owners of the Carmichael coal mine in exchange for an expansion of its operations. The government has promised every deferred dollar will be repaid with interest by mining giant Bravus, formerly known as Adani, but won't reveal details, such as when the money will be paid. Premier David Crisafulli said Bravus would spend $50 million to open the next stage of the Central Queensland mine as part of the arrangement. The mine is expected to expand its production by 30 per cent over the next four years — reaching 16 million tonnes per annum. "That money will be used to expand the workers' village, create a new dam, a rail network hub for maintenance, and additional engineering works," Mr Crisafulli said. "More importantly, it opens the door for half a billion dollars of investment and will enable an expansion to the tune of about a third of this mine. "Today's announcement and the agreement ends years of hostility. More importantly, it will open the door for years of productivity." The former Labor government initially signed a royalty deferral deal with Bravus in 2020, which Treasurer David Janetzki suggested became subject to "proceedings". He said those proceedings would now end, with the LNP government reaching a new arrangement with the mining company. "It is clear Bravus will repay every dollar to the Queensland people with interest. That is locked in," Mr Janetzki said. Mr Janetzki would not say how much interest would be charged or when the deferred royalties would be paid. He claimed this was due to commercial in confidence arrangements agreed to under the Labor government's deal. Bravus chief operating officer Mick Crowe said the new deal would help the company build stability for the mine. "For Bravus, this is a 30 per cent expansion in our capacity," he said. "It's a big investment in the infrastructure that underpins the future. "We'll continue to grow and invest in the 1,200 people who work out here. This creates more certainty for them in the future." Shadow Treasurer Shannon Fentiman described the deferral as a "secret sweetheart deal to provide Adani with a royalty holiday". Greens MP Michael Berkman also accused Mr Crisafulli of giving Bravus a "free pass" to dig up more coal. "What are Queenslanders getting out of this deal, and if it's so great, why can't we see the details," he said. The government has insisted the only difference between the previous deal under Labor and the new deal was the $50 million investment from Bravus.

ABC News
33 minutes ago
- ABC News
ACCC to investigate energy plans that promise savings but deliver poor value
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has announced it will investigate whether energy retailers are misleading consumers by advertising energy plans that promise savings yet actually provide poor value. This investigation follows a formal complaint filed by Australian Consumers' Association (CHOICE), which raised concerns that many plans marketed as "savings" deals are far from the cheapest options available. The investigation came after consumer group CHOICE filed its first 'designated complaint' to the ACCC in May. Under a new framework that came into effect in May the previous year, CHOICE is one of three bodies that can file a 'super complaint' directly with the ACCC about issues affecting consumers. Each body can file only one complaint per year. Once it is submitted, the ACCC is required to assess and publicly respond within 90 days. CHOICE decided to use its one complaint to flag concerns that energy retailers use words like 'saver' or 'savings' to promote energy plans that are far from the cheapest available. "At a time when Australians are increasingly worried about being able to afford to keep the lights on, this has had a big financial impact," Andy Kollmorgen, Investigations Editor at CHOICE, said in a statement. CHOICE's complaint points to a major issue with how energy retailers advertise "savings" plans. "In some instances, they were even more expensive than the retailer's standing offer," says Rosie Thomas, CHOICE director of campaigns and communications. "Many consumers rely on these representations as indicators of value to inform their decision-making, but we found that many of these names and descriptions may not reflect genuine value." According to the latest national CHOICE survey, 84 per cent of households are concerned about rising electricity prices. But with so many plans marketed with promises of savings, it's hard for consumers to tell if they're actually getting a better deal. "We are concerned that consumers may be misled or deceived by plan names or descriptions of plans that offer 'savings' that are not genuine, or that consumers may be discouraged from switching to cheaper plans that are available to them," ACCC deputy chair Catriona Lowe said. "It is essential that energy retailers provide clear and accurate information about their energy plans so that consumers can make informed decisions when choosing an energy provider and plan." The confusion doesn't stop at the "savings" labels. Many energy retailers use identical names for plans that come with different rates, leading to further confusion for consumers. This issue is especially prevalent with the "better offer" and "best offer" messages on energy bills, which are meant to alert customers to cheaper plans available within the same provider. Unfortunately, these plans aren't always cheaper. A recent decision from the Australian Energy Regulator (AER) requires retailers to provide extra information under "better offer" messages when reusing plan names. "Consumers are often encouraged to shop around in order to save on their energy bills, but that's impossible to do if the information they receive from retailers is inaccurate, incomplete or designed to overwhelm," says Ms Thomas. The ACCC said that after careful consideration, the issues raised by CHOICE relating to the use of identical plan names in "better offer" and "best offer" messaging, are "most effectively addressed through the review and law reform processes currently underway by the AER and the ESC" and not an ACCC investigation. If the ACCC finds that energy retailers are breaching Australian Consumer Law following its investigation, it may take enforcement action where appropriate. It may also "prepare industry guidance or contribute to policy or law reform initiatives".

ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Tension in a tit-for-tat visa cancellation
Australia has cancelled the visa of a Netanyahu government MP. Israel has swiftly retaliated, revoking visas for Australia's representatives to the Palestinian Authority. What does this latest tit-for-tat mean for the already strained relationship? Meanwhile, Canberra is buzzing as the guest list for the Economic Reform Roundtable arrives. The government's word of the day is 'optimistic' - but what message are they really trying to send as day one kicks off? Patricia Karvelas and Raf Epstein break it all down on Politics Now. Got a burning question? Got a burning political query? Send a short voice recording to PK and Mel for Question Time at thepartyroom@