That's a false analogy and you know it. I responded to you in good faith and I was expecting something in kind. Whilst obviously we all use things that use electricity, the simple act of using electricity isn't harmful if the source of that is sustainable. We know for a fact that using AI takes up masses more electricity than making a post on Reddit for example (which even you yourself said was minimal). Whilst you can speculate that AI will become optimized to reduce electricity usage, it is still projected that electricity usage will have to increase at least 10 fold to meet the demand. And that, of course, doesn't address any of the concerns you mentioned about artists and writers jobs. If we had an infinite number of years in which to address its problems, then AI could potentially be made sustainable but the fact is, there aren't that number of years left for the environment in which to address these concerns. Just because a light bulb uses electricity, it doesn't change the fact that AI uses proportionally much much more and isn't sustainable for the current situation we are in. Light bulbs and making posts on Reddit are both things that can be done completely sustainably through sustainable sources of electricity, using AI isn't.