Reflection 1

“Is it sustainable that we continue on our current path of technological development?”

After the week 2 lecture, I’ve been thinking a lot about whether our current path in technology, especially AI, is sustainable. What really stood out to me from the readings and tutorials was Google’s water use, and the way they’ve tried to downplay the vast quantity they use. They claim one Gemini prompt only uses a few drops of water, but experts say this hides the bigger picture of indirect water and energy consumption (Rainey, 2025). It feels like an invisible truth, hidden from the public, and not by accident. That worries me because in education and society we’re encouraged to embrace AI tools without questioning the impact it has on the environment.

I feel conflicted. On one hand, AI can save time and create opportunities for learning, but I also feel unsettled. What if there’s a massive power outage, or something unexpected happens and we don’t have access to technology? It feels dangerous to rely so heavily on technology that are vulnerable. I also don’t trust that companies are prioritising the environment over profit. That fear is shaped by my own connection to the natural world. I grow vegetables, raise chickens, and live rurally. At the same time, I’ve worked in digital marketing and I’m a photographer, so I see the value of technology too. For me, it’s about finding balance and not losing touch with skills that really matter.

The positives of AI are obvious, it’s efficient and useful. But the costs are clearer now, overreliance, detachment from nature, loss of practical life skills, and environmental impacts we don’t directly see every day. Some people argue for innovation and development.  Others argue that money is winning out over humanity and nature. I agree with the second view.

Research shows the scale of the problem. MIT News (2025) points out that generative AI is resource-intensive, and one study estimated that training GPT-3 alone may have consumed around 700,000 litres of fresh water, with global AI water demand projected to reach billions of cubic meters by 2027 (Li et al., 2023). These figures are huge, and have real implications for ecosystems. It makes me think that if we can build technology this advanced, surely we can also build solutions? But that would require genuine commitment to sustainability, and not just profit.

Personally, I’ve learned how much I value balance. I’m an early adopter of technology and enjoy its benefits, but I also believe we can’t over rely on it. Before these readings I didn’t realise the environmental impact of AI, and my perspective has shifted. If we keep ignoring the balance between technology and nature, the consequences could be devastating, not just in resource depletion, but in disconnection from humanity.

As a future teacher, I want to model balance. I’ll use technology in the classroom, but also give students practical, hands on experiences. I want them to see both sides, how powerful technology can be, and how valuable life is without it. Personally, I’ll keep using AI to help me live sustainably, even if it feels ironic. For me, AI has a place, but it will never replace the grounding I find in nature and family.

References

Li, P., Yang, J., Islam, M. A., & Ren, S. (2023). Making AI less “thirsty”: Uncovering and addressing the secret water footprint of AI models https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2304.03271

MIT News. (2025, January 17). Explained: The environmental impact of generative AI. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. https://news.mit.edu/2025/explained-generative-ai-environmental-impact-0117

Rainey, C. (2025, August 6). They’re just hiding the critical information. Google’s latest AI efficiency claims spark backlash over hidden environmental costs. Windows Central. https://www.windowscentral.com/artificial-intelligence/google-gemini-ai-efficiency-claims-debate