and you don’t seem to understand…

solar panels in a desert seems relative low impact infrastructure

honestly I think this discussion is probably a few decades ahead of our time, and were it not for op I would never raise it in this sub. there will probably come a time, however, when I consider supporting ai rights morally imperative. in any case I agree animal rights are more urgent and real atm.

I think we need to be cautious about this type of animal vs machine thinking, since ultimately all existences are “manufactured” in one way or another, and the main component (carbon or silicon) should not be a relevant criterion in morality. The ability to feel pain or form other forms of complex sentients, IMO, should.

on the flip side, under what criteria will further utilization of ai become exploitation to the machine and considered an issue in the vegan movement?

I looked into the gwp* thing and it is more appropriate for macroscopic / global analysis than for the carbon accounting of individuals. if one reduces 1 unit per year of emission of short live GHG now, can they claim the positive climate effects by comparing with the counterfactual baseline, where they continue to emit the GHG with the same rate forever? That is the equivalent of claiming an infinite amount of emission reduction.

in any case it is always possible to use a pulse response function to account for the gwp of any instantaneous emission increase/decrease, since gwp* is just the convolution of the pulse response over time.

just thinking: why stop at 2? I suppose a grid of heat towers with mirrors beneath would provide maximum utilization of the solar radiation

its the marginal cost of running existing plants, mainly from fuel cost.