Will AI Make Climate Change Worse?

A coal-fired electricity generating plant in Pennsylvania'
AI is greatly increasing electrical demand, meaning
decommissioning fossil fuel run plants like this
are being postponed, harming the 
battle against climate change. 

 It turns out it takes TONS of electricity to generate AI. 

So much so that electricity demand in the United States, which had been on the stable side in recent years, is set to soar.  And that might screw up the battle against climate change. 

The amount of electricity needed for data centers will more than double between now and 2035. The increase is the equivalent to the amount of electricity the entire state of California used in 2022.

According to Environment America Research Policy Center: 

"Data centers currently make up 3 percent of America's energy demand but that is expected to rise to 8 percent by 2030.

The increase in data center electricity is primarily due to the significant data processing needs of Artificial Intelligence. As AI development accelerates, the need for data processing grows, and companies have to build more and larger data centers to meet those needs - and those data centers use a lot of electricity."

Moving toward EVs and other conversions that supposedly move away from fossil fuel is of course a good thing if you don't want to worsen climate change. 

But if demand for electricity skyrockets, the worry is some of that needed electrical generation won't be clean energy.  

Until now, electricity use hasn't grown much because of efforts to improve energy efficiency. As Environment America points out, the cleanest energy is the energy that never gets used in the first place.

They go on:

"When electricity demand is lower or at least stable and predictable, it is much easier to meet that demand with clean energy like wind and solar. A rapid and unexpected surge in electricity demand is the last thing we need, particularly when energy demand is already expected to grow due to electrification of buildings and transportation."

Environment America notes that utilities have extended the life span of coal plants and proposed new methane gas plants to meet the expected growth in demand from all these data centers. 

Each AI query a person does uses up a lot of juice. As NPR reported, one query to ChatGPT uses about as much electricity as what could power one light bulb for 20 minutes.  One ChatGPT query needs about ten times the amount of electricity as a Google search query.

So imagine what happens when millions of people are poking around Chat GPT or other sources of AI help. 

And as NPR tells us, a majority of that energy needed for AI still comes from the burning of fossil fuels like coal and gas.

The Washington Post tells us that soaring power consumption is delaying coal plant closures in Kansas, Nebraska, Wisconsin and South Carolina. 

Not only does this spiraling demand threaten to aggravate climate change, it also is making regulators worry that residential ratepayers will be stuck paying for the upgrades to the electrical grid

 Then there's this question. Like almost every Next Big Thing I've ever seen, there tends to be an over-enthusiasm bubble which might hit here. 

Will tech companies overbuild data centers only to see demand for AI fall short, maybe because of government regulation,  just too much capacity, or maybe the Next, Next Big Thing will come along after AI to wow the masses. 

If that happens, will we have built climate-damaging fossil fuel generating plants for no good reason?  And how much unnecessary emissions would that add to the world? 

I guess as the world gets more complicated, so does the battle against climate change. 

Miraculously, No Deaths So Far In Epic New York Flooding

Screen grab from a news video showing Park Slope,
Brooklyn under water Friday. 

 Social media was blasting with incredible videos Friday of streets in and around New York City deep under water, with cars floating around, waterfalls pouring into basements and subways stations in one of the worst floods in the region's history. 

Seven to nine  inches of rain fell in some of the hardest hit areas in Brooklyn, Queens and Nassau County, Long Island, which is adjacent to Queens. 

So far, I've heard of no deaths from this storm. Which is awesome, since the storm hit such a populated area.  A populated area, by the way, that has lots of basement apartments. Those are especially dangerous in severe flash floods. 

In just slightly worse flooding with Hurricane Ida in 2021, when some 40 people died in and around New York City. 

This time, according to the Washington Post, people in six basement apartments were rescued, along with numerous motorist in inundated cars and trucks.  

This storm is being compared to Ida, but the worst of it covered a smaller area than that earlier storm from 2021. Drenching rains and some flooding hit from New Jersey to Massachusetts Friday. But the heaviest rain fell in a narrow band through eastern New York City, parts of the lower Hudson Valley and on into Fairfield County, Connecticut.

Here's why: A wet storm was off the coast. The storm wasn't tropical, but part of its energy came from the remains of Tropical Storm Ophelia, which dissipated last week off the coast. A weather front of sort, called an inverted trough, for much of the day extended northwestward from the storm through eastern New York City and western Long Island. 

Winds on the Atlantic Ocean side of this line roared in from the southeast, carrying boatloads of moisture. Winds on the west side of this trough came from the southwest, That meant lots of air collided along this sort of semi-weather front. 

When air converges like this, it has nowhere to go but up.  If you have lots of rising air and a ton of moisture in the air, all that moisture condenses into raindrops as the air rises. So you get the narrow band of torrential rains you saw Friday. 

You can see the variability of the rain due to this setup.  JFK Airport in Queens saw 8.65 inches of rain, its wettest day on record.  Central Park, just 16 miles to the northwest, had a very impressive but still much less 5.8 inches. Staten Island only had two to three inches of rain. 

Climate change is making extreme rains like Friday's downpours more likely.  The New York City drainage system, like in many cities, is designed for 20th century conditions, when such downpours were less likely. 

"The sad reality is our climate is changing faster than our infrastructure can respond," said Rohit Aggarwala, New York City's chief climate officer, according to the Washington Post.

You can see a trend: Including Friday, in Central Park, where records go back to around 1870,  four of the top seven wettest days on record have occurred since 2007.

Friday's storm is departing. Other than some minor coastal flooding from a combination of gusty east winds,  a seasonal King Tide, combined with higher sea levels from climate change, it's pretty much over.

The storm, as we know, had practically no effect in Vermont, thank goodness. It produced a rather rainy, dark and dank day in southern Vermont. Bennington picked up nearly a half inch of rain, and sprinkles reached as far north as Montpelier. 

Burlington had no rain, its 10th day in a row free of precipitation. No rain is expected at least through Wednesday.  

 

Extreme Rainfall Events Growing More Common And We're Not Ready

Flash flooding in Richmond, Vermont back in 2013.
Extreme rainfall events are becoming more common
nationwide, and our infrastructure isn't ready for it.

 This week, we watched the skies and radar images in Vermont for signs torrential rains were about to lead to flash flooding.   

We lucked out this time, with no reports of any major problems, though there was some flash flooding in  neighboring New Hampshire. 

This was just one local weather event, or potential one.

We know, however, that extreme rainfall events are increasing in much of the world due to climate change. That's true of most of the United States, and it's true here in Vermont. 

The latest bit of news on this comes from non-profit First Street Foundation. The gist of this latest peer-reviewed study is that emergency and flood planners are not taking into account a "new normal" that is bringing more extreme precipitation events to most of the United States, including here in Vermont.  

As the Washington Post reports: 

"Americans should consider the rising number of catastrophic rain events in recent decades not as outliers, but rather 'as the new normal for many area," Monday's report finds. 'What this means for communities today is that their understanding of risk is often underestimated,' the group wrote, 'and in many locations the infrastructure in place or that is currently being built to protect communities, property and individuals is built to an insufficient standard.'

The study starts with basic physics. As air temperature increases, it can hold more and more water vapor. For every 1 degree C increase, 7 percent more water is carried in the same air volume. 

This can have a dramatic effect on the intensity, duration and frequency of heat rain events.  

First Street looked at 795 accurate rainfall recording stations across the United States to reach their conclusion that 1 in 100 year rainfall events are actually now more frequent than the term implies. 

By the way, for accuracy, a 1 in 100 year rainfall event doesn't mean you'll have to wait 100 years for the next big flood. It just means that each year, there's a 1 percent chance of such an extreme event. 

In any event, what were 1 in 100 year events are now 1 in 50 year events. Or even sometimes more frequent than that. 

According to First Street: 

"The analysis reveals that a significant number of highly populated areas are experiencing higher flood risk than what the local communities consider a 1-in-100 year event. This highlights the urgent need for accurate rainfall data to inform infrastructure design and investment decisions. Furthermore, the analysis shows that cities like Baltimore, Dallas, Washington DC and New York City face substantial increases in risk."

The Washington Post gets into specifics: 

"By First Streets estimates, more than half of Americans now live in an area that is twice as likely to experience such a rain event than is predicted by Atlas 14, produced by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric and considered the gold standard of precipitation frequency estimates across the United States."

Current standards for building flood protections, proper drainage, and bridges and culverts large enough to handle floods cling to the old normal. The "new normal" makes these building standards obsolete, leaving communities more vulnerable to flooding. 

NOAA is working on an "Atlas 15" that would incorporate the changes in rainfall intensity and include estimates on future climate conditions. This takes a lot of research, testing and smart people, so Atlas 15 won't be available until 2027 or so. 

The First Street Study concludes that while we in Vermont are definitely at risk from these heavy rainfall episodes, other parts of the nation are in even worse shape.  Places like the Gulf Coast, much of Appalachia, some of the big cities in the Mid-Atlantic, and sections of the Midwest are most at risk. 

Here in Vermont, precipitation has increased by 21 percent since 1900, according to a 2021 Vermont Climate Assessment from the UVM Fund Institute for Environment.

The Vermont Climate Assessment states:

"Vermont now experiences 2.4 more days of heavy precipitation than in the 1960s, mostly in the summer. With flooding expected to increase, improved stormwater infrastructure and planning is required to reduce damage to homes, roads, bridges and farm fields. Heavier rainstorms will impact farm and forestry operations."

Vermont has been at risk for flash flooding almost all week.  As noted, we managed to avoid trouble this time.   Obviously a very good thing.  But when will our luck run out. 

Given the changing climate, the answer is probably sooner rather than later.