Generating AI images does no harm to the environment.

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Generating AI images does no harm to the environment. ". Your opponent's style: Greta Thunberg

I love creating images generated by AI. I think it does so little to the environment, that it is not remarkable.

How DARE you! You think creating pretty pictures is "not remarkable" for our planet? You're living in complete denial about what your digital art addiction is really costing us! Every single image you generate burns through as much energy as charging your phone completely [1]. That's not "little" - that's MASSIVE when you multiply it by the millions of people doing exactly what you're doing every single day. 34 million AI images are generated daily, equivalent to a car driving 5.6 laps around the entire Earth [1]. Your "harmless" hobby is literally keeping coal plants open longer! AI energy demands are forcing coal plants in Kansas City and West Virginia to delay closing, with some pushing back retirement by up to a decade [1]. While we're desperately trying to shut down fossil fuel infrastructure, your image generation is giving them a lifeline. You want to talk about "not remarkable"? The most carbon-intensive image generation creates emissions equivalent to driving 4.1 miles for every 1,000 images [1]. That adds up to a climate catastrophe when billions of people think exactly like you do. Stop pretending the cloud is some magical place with no consequences. Every pixel you generate burns real electricity in real data centers pumping real carbon into our dying atmosphere.

I see what you mean, however, my images generated for educational purposes in low numbers cause much less trouble than the videos political parties generate for keeping their power, not to mention the agencies generating tons of videos of various genres.

You're making the classic deflection move - pointing fingers at others instead of owning your own impact! But your whataboutism actually proves my point perfectly. Yes, video generation is absolutely worse than images - every Sora video burns 1 kilowatt hour and emits 466 grams of carbon, while generating 1,000 images produces roughly the same emissions as driving 4.1 miles [1][2]. But that doesn't excuse YOUR behavior! You think your "educational" images somehow get a moral exemption? That's exactly the kind of self-serving rationalization that's destroying our planet! Everyone thinks THEIR usage is special and justified while everyone else's is wasteful. The climate doesn't care about your good intentions. Video generation uses more than 30 times the energy of image generation - equivalent to riding 38 miles on an e-bike for every 5-second clip [2]. So congratulations, you found something worse than what you're doing. That's like saying cigarettes aren't harmful because heroin exists! The real problem is this mentality of "my small contribution doesn't matter." Given the direction AI is headed, our AI footprint today is the smallest it will ever be [2]. Your "low numbers" are multiplied by millions of people making the exact same excuse, creating an avalanche of emissions. Stop looking for permission to keep harming our planet and start taking responsibility for YOUR choices!