Anyone trying to push for “managing” AI or “sustainably” supporting AI is not operating in reality.
These tech magnates literally want to be kings. This isn’t hyperbole or a metaphor at all, it’s literal in the literal sense of the word literal.
AI that needs the monstrosity data centers literally cannot be powered “sustainably” with renewables. So anyone trying to tell us that this AI boom can be propped up and sustainably managed with renewables is straight up in fantasyland, or being dishonest. The tech industry leaders themselves admit that it isn’t possible to power this technology without massive amounts of power. Eric Schmidt said oil from the Middle East would be necessary or all of Canada’s resources, to be able to run AI as planned. They’re planning on starting coal plants back up. They articulate openly that the AI chatbot LLM technology specifically is what needs all these data centers. They may push trickle down job promises to people at the same time promising employers an “AI Jobs Apocalypse”, but the numbers tell the real story.
AI companies will NEVER be able to “lead the way” toward sustainability or renewable energy doing what they’re doing, and I don’t even think there’s any good evidence they actually want to. By now it should be obvious that “climate pledges” were always just political PR to allow politicians off the hook from actually moving to regulate the industry properly. Politicians are eager to let tycoons and corporations off the hook because they want that money from the industry, and maybe a job in the industry after they lose their next election because they sided with industry against their own constituents. But everyone surely knows by now that corporations by their very nature and definition can’t promote what’s good for people and communities because they are required by law to serve their profit making goals. They do however have to observe legally enforced regulations by the government. Governance is literally required if you want to make industry act in the interest of humans welfare and the benefit of communities. This is the objective reality and anything that denies the facts here should be regarded with extreme side-eye.
“In developing regulations the EPA was directed to weigh only one concern: public health. The costs to industry were explicitly deemed irrelevant.” — Jane Mayer, Dark Money, 2016
So when you see anything that takes leave of the rational facts of reality, you know you’re being handed a line. And very often it’s an industry talking point trying to persuade you not to resist. The main red flag to look for with AI and data centers is the industry propaganda push telling people wrongly that AI is inevitable. When of course all the financial particulars about this tech screams bubble, and an inevitable crash to come somewhere down the line.
But alas, people supposedly “on our side” will keep tripping us up it seems.
Unfortunately this isn’t the first time the supposedly “progressive” Bucks County Beacon has published right-wing framing within their content recently. I don’t know what the hell is going on there, but it’s very disappointing they’re regurgitating industry PR.
Just consider the statement that industry “must lead the way” it may sound like a call to industry leaders, but in fact, it’s a message to us, to persuade us to stand down, lay back and let “business leaders” of industry decide what happens to you and your community.
Because the idea that AI companies could possibly lead the way toward an equitable future and mitigating climate change is so illogical as to make that statement a completely nonsensical assertion with no meaning whatsoever unless you consider that it’s industry astroturfed persuasion, whether the original authors understood what they are parroting or not. Many people recite industry talking points unwittingly because they’ve been trained by hearing them repeated so often it infects the discourse. And that’s perhaps how it winds up embedded in op-eds that get regurgitated at various outlets.
Or, it could be that some people in the sustainable power industry are planting this PR in what looks like environmental community concern op-eds. And I suspect that because they don’t seem to be concerned with stopping the AI bubble being the solution. They don’t seem to be that concerned about the harm being caused by AI products, nor do they seem to want to stop the monstrosity data centers that they admit are wrecking communities.
It would make sense that from the perspective of the solar industry, they would want all of the AI boom to continue, but with them making more money on it, instead of getting pushed all the way out by fossil fuel interests. And then people woke-wash the issue, and make it sound like the only 2 choices you have are monstrosity data centers wrecking communities powered by fossil fuel, OR monstrosity data centers wrecking communities but powered by solar electricity. And again, they are industry, they are businesses, and they have the goal of making money, making a profit, so by definition even the solar industry can’t be prioritizing public health or community safety. Even if solar is better than fossil fuel, their proximity to companies with worse politics doesn’t make them heros by comparison. The interests of the solar industry to want to get in on this AI bubble boom runs counter to the community interests to stop these monstrosity data centers ruining communities. But even beyond that, again, renewables could never possibly prop up this AI industry bubble as it is, it’s physically impossible, and the people in the industry admit that. So even suggesting that is disinngenuous. Because we know they tell us that’s why they’re pushing for nuclear, coal, and even burning tires, or perhaps even plastic. And then the numbers don’t add up, and scarcity is an issue. Covering the earth in data centers with solar panels isn’t the answer either, it’s quite frankly just as preposterous as Sam Altman’s suggestion to make a Dyson Sphere of data centers.
Note: The op-ed that quote about “AI companies must lead” quote came from was co-authored by someone named Todd Larsen, and that would appear to be the same Todd Larsen who is an attorney with The Clean Energy Counsel, a legal firm representing “clean energy” companies in navigating legal regulatory hurdles. That op-ed has appeared in several outlets recently with the headline “Communities Pay the Price for ‘Free’ AI Tools” and the op-ed also hilariously suggests that these “corporate giants” could be “good neighbors”.
“Currently according to some estimates, more than 50% of what we think is news is actually instigated by the public relations industry. PR professionals measure their success in terms of how well they can insert their clients’ messages into the continuous flow of news and information while their own activities remain out of view.” — Toxic Sludge is Good for You (documentary 2002)
Anyone in education or labor buying into shoving the AI hype wave on the rest of us is on the wrong side of things.
And that’s why it’s doubly appalling that American Federation of Teachers union is “partnering” with these big tech industry behemoths to promote this flawed shoddy tech that doesn’t work and increasingly is being shown to be harmful.
Mystery AI Hype Theater 3000: The Newsletter September 9, 2025 Back to School is Better Without “AI” It’s that time of year again, when fall is in the air and “AI” is back and worse than ever, creepy-crawling into every corner of our education system. This week at Bloomberg, Vauhini Vara dug into the billion dollar industry behind the push from big companies to introduce AI into every stage of a US students’ educational life. OpenAI, Google and Microsoft have all poured money into creating “education-centered” versions of their products, Vara reports, in an effort to produce a new generation of AI “super users.” Now they’re working overtime to convince students, teachers, school administrators, universities and politicians to buy in. Even some unions supposed to represent the interest of education workers have capitulated to the hype wave. Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, announced in July that the union is partnering with Microsoft, Anthropic and OpenAI to train 40,000 teachers to use “AI.” (We talked about this at length in one of our recent episodes, “Et Tu, American Federation of Teachers”. Listen here.) How about no?
How about no.
Cognitive scientists and AI researchers make a forceful call to reject “uncritical adoption” of AI in academia – A new paper calls on academia to repel rampant AI in university departments and classrooms. Brian Merchant Sep 07, 2025 A group lead by cognitive scientists and AI researchers hailing from universities in the Netherlands, Denmark, Germany, and the US, has published a searing position paper urging educators and administrations to reject corporate AI products. The paper is called, fittingly, “Against the Uncritical Adoption of ‘AI’ Technologies in Academia,” and it makes an urgent and exhaustive case that universities should be doing a lot more to dispel tech industry hype and keep commercial AI tools out of the academy.
Industry deciders is not democracy.
Environmental activists do NOT need to promote renewable energy industry talking points. They have plenty of funding to lobby for their industry and put out PR for themselves. Ordinary advocates do NOT need to take a back seat to solar industry lobbying talking points. Teachers do not have to partner with AI companies. And it should be obvious that labor unions should not be partnering with industry.
The ones who should lead the way in a democracy are the people.
But of course these tech tycoons of the AI industry are literally against democracy. And yeah, they themselves have said so many times.
So maybe just don’t promote or partner with that, alright?