By Bernardo Filipe / January 3, 2026
Some complain that AI uses too much energy and that it is bad for the environment. There were already people complaining about bitcoin’s energy usage back in 2021, so it makes sense people would now attack AI for the same reason. And I say to them what I said to the bitcoin haters: 1) not all energy is equally hard on the environment, and 2) who are we to tell the AI companies where to use the energy they buy? Plus, how much energy does it cost to send rockets to Mars? Technological progress is supposed to be costly. Doubling or tripling the global energy usage is a good thing. If we could double our energy production every year, that would be fantastic. Our goal is to progress technologically (and eventually colonize the galaxy) and we need all the energy we can get to accomplish this. The complainers are not megalomaniacal enough. But it’s OK. Nobody is forcing them to use AI. If they are so inclined, they can emigrate to Siberia and live a life free of mass energy consumption there (though, I hear there are some big data centers there, too).
The complainers are essentially asking us to halt all progress. But that’s not going to happen. It’s too late now. There’s literally nothing you can do now to stop AI’s impeding general adoption. If one country decides to ban AI, several others won’t. And if by 2027 AI uses more energy than Argentina, maybe it’s because AI is bigger than Argentina, too. As for pollution, we are aware of the problem and are doing all we can to reduce it. But the fears that pollution will stop AI’s general adoption are not grounded in reality.
The Stillest 