Science
How much more water and power does AI computing demand? Tech firms don't want you to know
Every time someone uses ChatGPT to write an essay, create an image or advise them on planning their day, the environment pays a price.
A query on the chatbot that uses artificial intelligence is estimated to require at least 10 times more electricity than a standard search on Google.
If all Google searches similarly used generative AI, they might consume as much electricity as a country the size of Ireland, calculates Alex de Vries, the founder of Digiconomist, a website that aims to expose the unintended consequences of digital trends.
Yet someone using ChatGPT or another artificial intelligence application has no way of knowing how much power their questions will consume as they are processed in the tech companies’ enormous data centers.
De Vries said the skyrocketing energy demand of AI technologies will no doubt require the world to burn more climate-warming oil, gas and coal.
“Even if we manage to feed AI with renewables, we have to realize those are limited in supply, so we’ll be using more fossil fuels elsewhere,” he said. “The ultimate outcome of this is more carbon emissions.”
AI is also thirsty for water. ChatGPT gulps roughly a 16-ounce bottle in as few as 10 queries, calculates Shaolei Ren, associate professor of electrical and computer engineering at UC Riverside, and his colleagues.
The increasing consumption of energy and water by AI has raised concerns in California and around the globe. Experts have detailed how it could stall the transition to green energy, while increasing consumer’s electric bills and the risk of blackouts.
To try to prevent those consequences, De Vries, Ren and other experts are calling on the tech companies to disclose to users how much power and water their queries will consume.
“I think the first step is to have more transparency,” Ren said. The AI developers, he said, “tend to be secretive about their energy usage and their water consumption.”
Ren said users should be told on the websites where they are asked to type in their queries how much energy and water their requests will require. He said this would be similar to how Google now tells people searching for airline flights how much carbon emissions the trip will generate.
“If we had that knowledge,” he said, “then we could make more informed decisions.”
Data centers — enormous warehouses of computer servers that support the internet — have long been big power users. But the specialized computer chips required for generative AI use far more electricity because they are designed to read through vast amounts of data.
The new chips also generate so much heat that even more power and water is needed to keep them cool.
Even though the benefits and risks of AI aren’t yet fully known, companies are increasingly incorporating the technology into existing products.
In May, for example, Google announced that it was adding what it called “AI Overviews” to its search engine. Whenever someone now types a question into Google search, the company’s AI generates an answer from the search results, which is highlighted at the top.
Not all of Google’s AI-generated answers have been correct, including when it told a user to add Elmer’s glue to pizza sauce to keep cheese from sliding off the crust.
But searchers who don’t want those AI-generated answers or want to avoid the extra use of power and water can’t turn off the feature.
“Right now, the user doesn’t have the option to opt out,” Ren said.
Google did not respond to questions from The Times.
OpenAI, the company that created ChatGPT, responded with a prepared statement, but declined to answer specific questions, such as how much power and water the chatbot used.
“AI can be energy-intensive and that’s why we are constantly working to improve efficiencies,” OpenAI said. “We carefully consider the best use of our computing power and support our partners’ efforts to achieve their sustainability goals. We also believe that AI can play a key role in accelerating scientific progress in the discovery of climate solutions.”
Three years ago, Google vowed to reach “net-zero” — where its emissions of greenhouse gases would be equal to what it removed — by 2030.
The company isn’t making progress toward that goal. In 2023, its total carbon emissions increased by 13%, the company disclosed in a July report. Since 2019, its emissions are up 48%.
“As we further integrate AI into our products, reducing emissions may be challenging due to increasing energy demands from the greater intensity of AI compute,” the company said in the report.
Google added that it expects its emissions to continue to rise before dropping sometime in the future. It did not say when that may be.
The company also disclosed that its data centers consumed 6.1 billion gallons of water in 2023 — 17% more than the year before.
“We’re committed to developing AI responsibly by working to address its environmental footprint,” the report said.
De Vries said he was disappointed Google had not disclosed in the report how much AI was adding to its power needs. The company said in the report that such a “distinction between AI and other workloads” would “not be meaningful.”
By not separately reporting the power use of AI, he said, it is impossible to calculate just how much more electricity Google search was now using with the addition of AI Overviews.
“While capable of delivering the required info,” he said, “they are now withholding it.”
Science
FBI probes cases of missing or dead scientists, including four from the L.A. area
WASHINGTON — Amid growing national security concerns, the FBI said Tuesday that it has launched a broad investigation in the deaths or disappearances of at least 10 scientists and staff connected to highly sensitive research, including four from the Los Angeles area.
“The FBI is spearheading the effort to look for connections into the missing and deceased scientists. We are working with the Department of Energy, Department of War, and with our state and state and local law enforcement partners to find answers,” the agency said in a statement.
The FBI’s announcement comes after the House Oversight Committee announced that it would investigate reports of the disappearance and deaths of the scientists, sending letters seeking information from the agencies involved in the federal inquiry as well as NASA, which owns the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in La Cañada Flintridge, where three of the missing or dead scientists worked.
“If the reports are accurate, these deaths and disappearances may represent a grave threat to U.S. national security and to U.S. personnel with access to scientific secrets,” Reps. James Comer (R-Ky.), chairman of the committee, and Eric Burlison (R-Mo.) wrote in the letters.
President Trump told reporters last week that he had been briefed on the missing and dead scientists, which he described as “pretty serious stuff.” He said at the time that he expected answers on whether the deaths were connected “in the next week and a half.”
Michael David Hicks, who studied comets and asteroids at JPL, was the first of the scientists who disappeared or died. He died on July 30, 2023, at the age of 59. No cause of death was disclosed.
A year later, JPL physicist Frank Maiwald died at 61, with no cause of death disclosed.
Two other Los Angeles scientists are part of the string of deaths and disappearances.
On June 22, 2025, Monica Jacinto Reza, a materials scientist at JPL, disappeared while on a hike near Mt. Waterman in the San Gabriel Mountains.
On Feb. 16, Caltech astrophysicist Carl Grillmair was fatally shot on the porch of his Llano home. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s department arrested Freddy Snyder, 29, in connection with the shooting. Snyder had been arrested in December on suspicion of trespassing on Grillmair’s property.
Snyder has been charged with murder.
There is no evidence at this point that the deaths and disappearances, which occurred over a span of four years, are connected.
A spokesperson for NASA, which owns JPL, said in a statement on X that the agency is “coordinating and cooperating with the relevant agencies in relation to the missing scientists.
“At this time, nothing related to NASA indicates a national security threat,” agency spokesperson Bethany Stevens wrote. “The agency is committed to transparency and will provide more information as able.”
Representatives from Caltech, which manages JPL, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Science
What’s in a Name? For These Snails, Legal Protection
The sun had barely risen over the Pacific Ocean when a small motorboat carrying a team of Indigenous artisans and Mexican biologists dropped anchor in a rocky cove near Bahías de Huatulco.
Mauro Habacuc Avendaño Luis, one of the craftsmen, was the first to wade to shore. With an agility belying his age, he struck out over the boulders exposed by low tide. Crouching on a slippery ledge pounded by surf, he reached inside a crevice between two rocks. There, lodged among the urchins, was a snail with a knobby gray shell the size of a walnut. The sight might not dazzle tourists who travel here to see humpback whales, but for Mr. Avendaño, 85, these drab little mollusks represent a way of life.
Marine snails in the genus Plicopurpura are sacred to the Mixtec people of Pinotepa de Don Luis, a small town in southwestern Oaxaca. Men like Mr. Avendaño have been sustainably “milking” them for radiant purple dye for at least 1,500 years. The color suffuses Mixtec textiles and spiritual beliefs. Called tixinda, it symbolizes fertility and death, as well as mythic ties between lunar cycles, women and the sea.
The future of these traditions — and the fate of the snails — are uncertain. The mollusks are subject to intense poaching pressure despite federal protections intended to protect them. Fishermen break them (and the other mollusks they eat) open and sell the meat to local restaurants. Tourists who comb the beaches pluck snails off the rocks and toss them aside.
A severe earthquake in 2020 thrust formerly submerged parts of their habitat above sea level, fatally tossing other mollusks in the snail’s food web to the air, and making once inaccessible places more available to poachers.
Decades ago, dense clusters of snails the size of doorknobs were easy to find, according to Mr. Avendaño. “Full of snails,” he said, sweeping a calloused, violet-stained hand across the coves. Now, most of the snails he finds are small, just over an inch, and yield only a few milliliters of dye.
Science
Video: This Parrot Has No Beak, But Is at the Top of the Pecking Order
new video loaded: This Parrot Has No Beak, But Is at the Top of the Pecking Order
By Meg Felling and Carl Zimmer
April 20, 2026
-
Technology3 minutes agoFake Windows update installs hidden malware
-
Business9 minutes agoNetflix plans to buy historic Radford Studio Center
-
Entertainment15 minutes agoAfter Epstein scandal, Hollywood bidders race for Wasserman’s $3-billion agency
-
Lifestyle20 minutes agoThe story behind this rare architectural speaker from cult Japanese fashion brand TheSoloist
-
Politics27 minutes agoBecerra sees momentum, money and movement in the polls in governor’s race
-
Science33 minutes agoFBI probes cases of missing or dead scientists, including four from the L.A. area
-
Sports39 minutes agoRams coach Sean McVay says Puka Nacua is ‘doing really well’ after rehab stint
-
World51 minutes agoTehran vows to ‘resist bullying’ as Trump extends Iran truce, blocks ports