Climate Advocacy and AI Safety: Supercharging AI Slowdown Advocacy

Epistemic Status: Exploratory. This is just a brief sketch of an idea that I thought I’d post rather than do nothing with. I’ll expand on it if it gains traction.

As such, feedback and commentary of all kinds are encouraged.

TL;DR

- There is a looming energy crisis in AI Development.

- It is unlikely that this crisis can be solved without using copious amounts of fossil fuels.

- This scenario presents a strategic opportunity for the AI slowdown advocacy movement to benefit from the substantial influence of the climate advocacy movement

- Misalignment of goals between the movements is a risk

- This strategy is a high-stakes bet that requires careful thought but likely demands immediate action.

The Situation

There is a looming energy crisis in AI Development. Recent projections about the energy requirements for the next generations of frontier AI systems are nothing short of alarming. Consider the estimates from former OpenAI researcher Leopold Aschenbrenner’s article on the next likely training runs:

- By 2026, compute for frontier models could consume about 5% of US electricity production.

- By 2028, this could rise to 20%.

- By 2030, it might require the equivalent of 100% of current US electricity production.

The implications are stark: the rapid advancement of AI is on a collision course with energy infrastructure and, by extension, climate goals.

Fig. 1 Probably not the future Greta Thunberg would advocate for

It is unlikely that this crisis can be solved without using copious amounts of fossil fuels. Given the projected timelines for AI development and the current state of renewable energy infrastructure, it’s highly improbable that this enormous energy demand can be met without heavy reliance on fossil fuels. This presents a critical dilemma:

1. Rapid AI advancement could significantly increase fossil fuel consumption, directly contradicting global climate goals.

2. Attempts to meet this energy demand with renewables would require an unprecedented and likely unfeasible acceleration in green energy infrastructure development.

This scenario creates a natural alignment of interests between climate advocates and those concerned about the risks of rapid AI development.

The Opportunity

This scenario presents a strategic opportunity for AI slowdown advocacy. The climate advocacy movement has spent decades building powerful infrastructure for public awareness, policy influence, and corporate pressure. This existing framework presents a unique opportunity for AI slowdown advocates:

  1. Megaphone Effect: By framing AI development as a major climate issue, we can tap into the vast reach and resources of climate advocacy groups.

  2. Policy Pressure: Climate advocates have experience in pushing for regulations on high-emission industries. This expertise could be redirected towards policies that limit large-scale AI training runs.

  3. Corporate Accountability: Many tech companies have made public commitments to sustainability. Highlighting the conflict between these commitments and energy-intensive AI development could create internal pressure for a slowdown.

  4. Public Awareness: The climate crisis is well-understood by the general public (and policymakers). Linking AI development to increased emissions could rapidly build support for AI regulation.

Fig. 2 An Epic Handshake

The Risk

Misalignment of goals is a risk. While this strategy offers significant potential, it’s important to consider possible drawbacks from a misalignment of goals: climate advocates may push for solutions (like rapid green energy scaling) that don’t align with AI slowdown goals. In reality, these potential misalignments seem manageable compared to the strategic benefits. The climate advocacy movement is closely linked to the sustainability movement which would find the idea of doubling energy consumption by any means anathema. Nevertheless, the fact that both movements have different world views and goals should be kept in mind when pursuing this strategy.

Conclusion

Collaborating with the climate advocacy movement is a high-stakes bet that requires careful thought but likely demands immediate action. With potentially short AI development timelines and the current intractability of AI slowdown advocacy, we must seriously consider high-payoff strategies like this – and fast.