 |
|
|
|||||
As part of the Trump administrations continued efforts to attack renewable energy and bolster the fossil fuel industry, officials are considering using emergency powers to bring retired coal plants back online and prevent others from shutting down. But doing so would raise electricity prices for Americans, come with disastrous environmental impacts for the world, and only benefit coal companies. While at CERAWeek, an energy conference by S&P Global, U.S. Interior Secretary Doug Burgim told Bloomberg Television about the potential coal resurgence. Under the national energy emergency, which President Trump has declared, weve got to keep every coal plant open, he said. And if there had been units at a coal plant that have been shut down, we need to bring those back. Coals dominance has been declining in the U.S. for years. It currently supplies just 16% of the countrys power, down from just over 51% in 2000. And since 2000, about 780 U.S. coal-fired units across the country have come offline; more than 120 coal plants are expected to shutter here within the next five years. Bringing those coal plants back is an incredibly dumb idea, says Peter Gleick, a climate scientist with a background in energy systems and a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences. Its dangerous. Its expensive. Its impractical. The logistics alone of bringing retired coal plants online would be difficult. Its not like turning on and off a lightbulb, he says. Many plants have been entirely decommissioned, and some have even been repurposed into renewable energy and storage projects. Bringing back the equipment to allow them to burn coalor updating outdated infrastructurewould be expensive and time consuming. In the last five years, most of the U.S. coal plants that closed were, on average, 50 years old; globally, coal plants have retired at an average age of 37 years, says Christine Shearer, an analyst at Global Energy Monitor. Those coal plants were also retired for economic reasons; it’s more expensive, Gleick says, for a utility company to run a coal plant than to build renewables or operate natural gas plants. A 2019 analysis found that about three-quarters of U.S. coal plants would save money by switching to wind or solar. A 2023 analysis upped that figure to 99% of coal plants. That means utilities likely wouldn’t want retired coal plants to come back online. Any attempt to do this will raise electricity prices for everyone, he adds. Coal producers themselves would profit from more coal, of course, and some utility companies have actually delayed coal plant retirements because of concerns around grid stabilitybut the cost of keeping those “zombie” coal plants open ends up falling on consumers. One Maryland coal plant set to close in 2025 will now be kept open until 2029, a move that could cost residents up to $250 million per year through higher energy bills. Then theres the environmental and health impacts. Burning coal is linked to air pollution that contains toxins and heavy metals, and can cause asthma, brain damage, heart problems, cancer, and even premature death. Bringing back retired coal plants would have a direct environmental and health impact on the local communities around such plants. When four Kentucky coal plants were either retired or retrofitted with emissions controls, one study found, local asthma-related hospitalizations plummeted. Coal plants have also primarily been located in low-income communities, as well as communities of color. But bringing back coal would do more than just damage people in the U.S. The environmental costs would be borne by the entire globe. Coal is by far the worst offender at releasing damaging, polluting greenhouse gasses, Gleick says. Environmental experts say the world needs to completely phase out coal power by 2040 in order to meet the Paris Climate Agreement goals. Some places have already completely retired their coal power plants. In September 2024, the United Kingdomthe first country to build a coal power plantbecame the first major economy to completely stop using coal to make electricity when its last coal power plant shut down. Even India and China, which both still burn immense amounts of coal, are trying to transition away from that energy source, because of both the economic and environmental costs. For us to go in the other direction is just lunacy, Gleick says. Its not coal specifically that Americans want, he notes; its energy broadly, and there are far more cheaper, faster ways to produce energylike through solar and wind. “If we are in an energy emergency then we should roll back the recent pauses on wind and solar permitting, not try to bring back old coal plants already a decade past their lifetime, on the backs of American ratepayers,” Shearer says. Solar specifically is the cheapest source of electricity, the International Energy Agency says, and also the fastest energy source to deploy. (Besides finding new sources of energy, we could also work to increase how energy efficient our systems and tools are, Gleick says, which is even less expensive to do.) No country that has reduced its dependence on coal would voluntarily go back to that energy source Gleick adds. “The only people who want more coal to be burned are fossil fuel company executives. No one else wants this,” he says. “Bringing coal back to the U.S. is not making America great again.”
Category:
E-Commerce
For the first two-and-a-half years of the generative AI revolution, the AI arms race has been waged between competing companies seeking to make bank from the promise and potential of the technology. But things are maturing in the AI worldand with it, theres another frontline for AI: the military. Scale AI, the company set up by Alexandr Wang, has been awarded what CNBC reports is a multimillion-dollar deal to help develop Thunderforge, which the U.S. Department of Defense calls an initiative designed to integrate artificial intelligence into military operational and theater-level planning, and fusing cutting-edge modeling and simulation tools. Wang told CNBC that our AI solutions will transform todays military operating process and modernize American defense and that they will provide our nations military leaders with the greatest technological advantage. The move is unsurprisingmilitaries are always keen on keeping at the cutting edge of technology, trying to eke out an advantage against competitive armiesbut disappointing, says Margaret Mitchell, researcher and chief ethics scientist at Hugging Face, an AI company. We already know we’re moving forward to push AI systems farther and farther out from our control, she says. Many in the industry and in the media are treating more and more powerful systems as if they are inevitable, and therefore making it so. Mitchell adds that technology has always relied on military clientele to act as a crucible for, and accelerant of, new innovation. Military use has long been a staple of technological development, she says. Massively destructive outcomes are fully predictable based on history and how the tech marketplace works. (Scale AI declined to comment. The Defense Department did not respond to Fast Company‘s request for comment.) That level of destruction could be catastrophic, argues David Krueger, assistant professor at the University of Montreal, studying AI safety and risk. I think its likely to lead to the end of humanity, to human extinction, he says, speaking generally about the use of AI for military purposes, calling the military use of AI one of the most obvious ways in which AI poses an existential risk to humanity. Krueger says that AI is being used in many areas to hand off human control and outsource it to AI systems. I think this is a risk in every domain, and I think in the military, its particularly concerning, and something which will require international collaboration to avoid getting out of hand and risking human extinction. Scale AI has said that the Thunderforge program will operate with human oversight, and Noah Sylvia, a research analyst at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), points out that as AI functions go, I would say it is not as controversial as a lot of other ones, because this is what you could term an enterprise function. Scale AI is far from the only company to ink a deal with the U.S. military to leverage the power of AI to support such activities. A number of companies have also agreed terms to provide their AI technology for military purposes. I think part of the reaction is because they started out in a very civilian-oriented company, and over the past few months, especially, we’ve seen all of these civilian companies suddenly turn towards defense more, says Sylvia. Indeed, the press release by the Defense Innovation Unit announcing Scale AIs deal for Thunderforge points out the same program will also include Andurils Lattice software platform and state of the art LLMs enabled by Microsoft. I struggle to see a way out of it, says Hugging Face’s Mitchell. Even if individual countries or companies were to decide to step aside from using AI for military purposes, or to decline to provide support to countries that are seeking military AIas Hugging Face has refused to do in the pastothers would likely step into the breach. We need some ability to coordinate to prevent actors from building AI systems, says the University of Montreal’s Krueger. I think that should bein factthe number-one priority in foreign policy for every country at this point because its an incredibly important issue, and its going to be difficult to address it. Developing cross-country guidelines for how to consider the use of AI in military environments will be vital in the future, says Mitchell. She suggests a multipoint plan that includes keeping AI systems within strict operational boundaries, making it impossible for systems to autonomously deploy weapons, introducing safety mechanisms, and advancing whats deemed state of the art in input data analysis and output evaluation to gain a deeper understanding into what systems can and cannot do. She also has two simpler suggestions. Do not deploy technology whose actions you cannot reasonably foresee, she says. And secondly: Do not fully cede human control.
Category:
E-Commerce
Most of us want to remain in our existing homes as we grow older. The practice of aging in place aligns with preferences for familiar places and routines and preserves our sense of independence. These preferences, though, raise questions about what support seniors want and need in their current homes. Japan has advanced the use of robotics specifically for this purpose, with mixed results. Despite these early results, the continued development of robotics and artificial intelligence to assist those aging in place seems obvious. Whats less obvious is how seniors foresee AI and robots living alongside them and what specifically they envision these things doing.To better understand how seniors want AIs and robots to help in their homes, we asked them. We recruited seniors from the MIT AgeLabs research cohorteach around 70 years old and in the early stages of retirementand then engaged in wide-ranging conversations about their aspirations and fears about these technologies. This framework distinguishes between digital and physical AIs and outlines the key ways theyre meant to help people in their homes. [Image: courtesy Teague] During these conversations, we explored various forms of both digital and physical AIeverything from digital assistants to handy robotseach with different capabilities and limitations. The result: Here are four types of AIs that could operate in the future lives of seniors at home, along with what present-day seniors think of them, and the key considerations well need to account for when designing them. Advisor AI A digital presence that suggests solutions to problems, surfaces opportunities, and helps its person remember to do things. Examples: The AI helps verify the veracity of unfamiliar communications like scam phone calls; identifies activities of interest and assists in planning how to participate; offers timely reminders to take medications; and prompts calls to friends and family members on their birthdays. What seniors think: Thanks to established assistants like Amazons Alexa and Apples Siri, seniors say theyre already familiar with this form of AI, both inside and outside their homes, and can easily anticipate its further evolution. Moving forward, though, seniors want more from the Advisor archetype. They want the Advisor to go beyond pragmatic help with reminders about daily life and grow into helping them with their social well-being. This will mean providing actionable support with emotional concerns, especially social isolation, by surfacing and facilitating a seniors human connections. Butler Robot AI A physical presence that attends to its person by assisting with dynamic needs, such as deliveries, health, and home monitoring. Examples: The AI robot lifts a delivery from the porch to the foyer; assists in turning off the water at the source of a leak in the kitchen; and renders assistanceand summons help, if neededin the event of a fall. What seniors think: Due to the confluence of connected personal devices like smartwatches and earbuds with connected home devices such as smart thermostats and automated lighting, seniors believe there are increasingly complex interactions between their bodies and their homes. So they see how an AI robot helping to manage these complexities could reduce their cognitive load. They also acknowledge, though, that this form of AI in the home is far from simple in its creation and requires a lot of features and expansive capabilities. Just like a human butler, here theres a distinct possibility of robots just for rich people, which will require breakthroughs in manufacturability and new business models to avoid. Conductor AI A digital presence that operates connected systems of modules such as wheeled porters and object lifters. Examples: The AI responds to voice commands to transport meals from the kitchen to the living room with a wheeled porter; elevates an adjustable-height table adjacent to the dryer to ease folding clothes; and summons an autonomous vacuum to address a spill. What seniors think: This is a challenging archetype for seniors to conceptualize in their homes since it exists beyond any present-day solutions. Nonetheless, theyre compelled by the prospect of an overarching, digital administrator of a set of modular, task-driven devices. Perhaps because its the least familiar to them in terms of having existing corollaries, seniors are less confident in speculative interactions with this archetype because an AI with a lot of control must earn a lot of trust. At the same time, they see this form of AI as capable of adapting to their changing physical needs as they age simply through the addition of new connected devices. This will mean creating sets of modules that can be added and subtracted, potentially through subscription models. Valet Robot AI A physical presence that attends to its person by helping with everyday tasks, such as cleaning, dressing, and grooming. Examples: The AI robot replaces a light bulb in high-ceiling recessed lighting; helps a person put on their socks and pants; cleans everyday surfaces such as kitchen and bath countertops; and dusts bookshelves and framed prints. What seniors think: Seniors equate the possibilities of this form of AI in the home with early home robots such as iRobots Roomba vacuum. While the focus of this archetype is on everyday tasks that include common housecleaning (versus the dynamic tasks of the Butler Robot AI archetype), it also includes help with everyday personal tasks like dressing and grooming. Interestingly, here seniors have some concerns about this form of AI helping in ways that bring it into physical contact with their bodies. This will require forms of this AI that are aesthetically compatible with seniors for such personal interactions.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||