[Changemaker Series] Digital Lives, Real Costs: Why Sustainability Must Account for Labor, Water, and Community Displacement - An Interview with Dr. Tamara Kneese

In the next part of our Changemaker Blog series, we share insights from our conversation with Dr. Tamara Kneese.

Tamara is a Senior Research Scientist at the Partnership on AI. Tamara’s research focuses on investigating the material and social costs of digital technology; comparing and linking the past developments of computers and automated systems with current studies of people working on digital platforms and jobs involving care.

In this conversation, Tamara unpacks the hidden environmental costs of our digital lives, the systems-level challenges of making AI and internet infrastructures sustainable, and the ways young changemakers can help build a more just, regenerative digital future.

What do you think are the most important concepts or aspects that young people should understand about how the internet works and its ecological cost? What role can they play in shaping more sustainable digital futures over the next 5 - 10 years?

Tamara Kneese:

The first thing to understand is that the internet is not an abstract cloud floating somewhere in the sky – it is deeply material. Every click, search, or AI interaction runs through a global network of data centres, servers, cables, and energy systems that require enormous amounts of land, water, and electricity. Young people should recognise that this infrastructure has a real ecological cost. The energy powering our devices often comes from non-renewable sources, and the hardware we use is tied to global supply chains that extract critical minerals through exploitative labour practices.

Over the next decade, youth can play a key role by demanding accountability and transparency from governments and corporations. They can engage in movements that connect digital rights with climate justice — pushing for carbon-neutral data centres, fair labour practices in tech manufacturing, and policies that prioritise sustainability across the computing supply chain.

Based on your expertise, what are the most significant environmental impacts of the internet’s infrastructures today? What are some lesser-known aspects of this footprint that deserve more attention?

Tamara Kneese:

Most people are familiar with the idea that the internet consumes vast amounts of energy. But what is less visible and perhaps more damaging is the toxic legacy of electronics manufacturing.

If we look back historically, the computing industry has long relied on chemicals that are toxic to humans and ecosystems. For Instance, in Silicon Valley during the 1970s and 1980s, women workers, many of them immigrants, were exposed to harmful substances while assembling microchips. Many suffered from cancer, miscarriages, and birth defects. When manufacturing shifted to places like Taiwan and South Korea in the 1980s and 1990s, those same hazards followed, affecting another generation of mostly female migrant workers. So when we talk about AI or the cloud, we are really seeing an intensification of these older environmental injustices. The mining of rare minerals, water usage, and energy consumption continue to create inequality, especially in communities that bear the costs of pollution but rarely share in the benefits of digital progress.

What are some of the system-level challenges in making the internet and AI more sustainable? Where are the biggest gaps - in citizen awareness, research, industry, or policy?

Tamara Kneese:

One of the biggest challenges is that digital sustainability is treated as a corporate metric rather than a social movement issue. Companies measure their emissions and publish net-zero reports, but these do not capture the lived realities of communities affected by water shortages, the acquisition of farmland disturbing income supplies for communities, as well as displacing them, and pollution caused by data centres.

There is also a governance gap. Sustainability efforts are uneven across regions and highly dependent on local politics and thus are fragmented. For example, in the U.S., environmental protections vary not only from state to state but even from county to county. This patchwork allows corporations to build massive, energy-intensive data centres in places with weaker regulations, often in marginalised communities.

Finally, there is a research and awareness gap. While scientists and policy experts study the carbon footprint of AI, we lack comprehensive frameworks that include water usage, mineral extraction, biodiversity loss, and social equity. Sustainability must go beyond carbon accounting to include justice, transparency, and the right to a liveable planet.

Can you share some promising examples or initiatives that are trying to make the internet more sustainable? What makes them effective?

Tamara Kneese:

A standout initiative is the Sustainable Subsea Networks Project, led by Professor Nicole Starosielski at UC Berkeley. This project examines the hidden carbon and ecological costs of the submarine cables that connect our global internet. It is a collaborative effort between academia and industry to build transparency and accountability into this overlooked part of digital infrastructure.

What makes projects like this effective is their global, cross-sector approach – bringing together researchers, technologists, and local communities. The idea is to reimagine how connectivity can be decarbonised.

Another source of optimism comes from grassroots resistance. Local communities and journalists have successfully pressured companies and governments to adopt stricter environmental standards. For instance, in Oregon, advocacy groups pushed through legislation that prevents residents from bearing the rising electricity costs tied to data centre expansion.

True sustainability requires both bottom up activism and top down policy reform. Companies rarely change out of goodwill – they respond to pressure, transparency, and organized civic action.

From your perspective, what should be included in a toolkit for young people to understand the internet’s ecological impact and build sustainable digital futures? What kind of support do they need to contribute meaningfully?

Tamara Kneese:

A good toolkit should go beyond awareness. It should help young people connect abstract digital systems to their local realities – showing, for instance, how a nearby data centre affects regional water tables, energy grids, or housing costs.

It should include:

• Visual maps of internet infrastructures (like data centres, undersea cables, or mining regions).

• Case studies that illustrate both harm and resistance.

• Guides to advocacy and policy engagement, helping youth navigate how to pressure institutions effectively.

Beyond information, young people need platforms and mentorship – opportunities to collaborate with scientists, journalists, and policymakers. They should be supported to develop community-based projects that connect sustainability with digital literacy.

For youth in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region, especially, the starting point could be local research and organising, understanding where digital infrastructures intersect with existing environmental issues such as deforestation, mining, and water scarcity.

Can you highlight some factors that contributed to the success of sustainable internet infrastructures? 

Tamara Kneese:

Success tends to emerge where community engagement, governance, and transparency intersect. For example, local initiatives that link data centre energy consumption to renewable grids, rather than fossil fuels, show measurable progress.

Key factors include:

• Strong governance models, where policy supports environmental standards rather than corporate interests.

• Local participation, ensuring that communities most affected by infrastructure decisions have a voice.

• Public pressure and media coverage, which hold corporations accountable and push regulators to act.

  
  

What role do you think AI will play in sustainable internet futures?

Tamara Kneese:

AI is a double-edged sword. On one hand, it is an enormous consumer of energy and resources, especially with large, general-purpose models that require massive computing power. But on the other hand, AI can also be part of the solution – if applied wisely.

For example, AI can optimise energy efficiency within data centres or model better resource allocation for renewable grids. The challenge lies in choosing the right scale and purpose for AI. We do not need massive generative models for every task. Companies like Hugging Face are pioneering smaller, specialised models that perform specific functions with much lower environmental costs. This shift toward small and smart AI could dramatically reduce the sector’s ecological footprint.

Ultimately, sustainability in AI is not just about technology – it is about political will. As long as governments and corporations race to build the largest, most powerful systems in the name of competition, we will continue to reproduce unsustainable patterns. The goal should be responsible innovation that prioritizes people and the planet over performance benchmarks.

The internet may feel infinite, but it is built on finite resources. As Tamara Kneese reminds us, digital technologies mirror our social and ecological systems, including many of their historical inequalities. Making the internet sustainable is not only a technical challenge, but it also requires rethinking who benefits, who bears the costs, and how we can collectively design a digital world that sustains life rather than exploits it. 

For young changemakers, the work begins with curiosity, community, and courage. Understanding that every byte has a footprint, and every action can shape the systems that connect us.