“There is no stop the clock. There is no grace period. There is no pause.” So said Thomas Regnier, a spokesman for the European Commission, in response to calls for a pause on the EU’s AI Act. These landmark rules on artificial intelligence will, then, be rolled out according to the timeline specified in the legislation. The EC will ignore calls from 46 CEOs across the continent to halt the legislation for two years — including me.
This will surprise some people. My company, Kayrros, was the world’s first to track and attribute methane globally. We were cited when John Kerry announced the Global Methane Pledge, and we played a role in shaping the EU’s 2024 methane law. We have worked with countless organisations to monitor greenhouse gas emissions and other climate events — deforestation and wildfire spread, for example — and numerous businesses keen to reduce their carbon footprint. Surely, unregulated AI means an explosion in energy use and the creation of fuel-hungry data centres?
Here is my concern. The European Commission, in its zeal to pass the first major piece of AI regulation — and for the best of reasons, I should add — is missing the wood for the trees. Yes, we need guardrails. Yes, we need AI to be ethical and human-centred. Yes, AI is powerful, and powerful technologies have a way of developing in unpredictable ways. And yes, less regulation means more AI deployment, which means more energy use. But the AI Act is still a mistake.
First, AI will make industries vastly more efficient, reducing emissions for years to come. As Nvidia’s Jensen Huang has pointed out, once created, AI models perform tasks far more efficiently than traditional computing methods. For example, an AI weather model can forecast over 1,000 times more efficiently than conventional techniques can. Thus, whatever energy is invested in AI is repaid, with change, as the model is reused.
Due to recent developments in AI, such as the creation of increasingly sophisticated large language models (LLMs) and remote-sensing foundation models (RSFMs), data analysis that once took days now only needs hours. In my line of work, that means near-real-time analysis of satellite imagery, allowing us to do extraordinary things like predict floods and wildfires, enabling vast cost savings and, in the hands of the emergency services, potentially even preventing loss of life.
TNW City Coworking space – Where your best work happens
A workspace designed for growth, collaboration, and endless networking opportunities in the heart of tech.
But as my counterparts at BNP Paribas, AXA, Siemens, and countless other household names have persuasively argued, the real fear with the AI Act is that it will hamstring our ability to compete globally in the world’s most consequential technological field. Do not think that the world powers will have the same qualms that we in Europe do about this. They will race ahead into the future, as they have in other critical areas, like space, and create such a distance that it will become exponentially harder for us to catch up. This is not what we need: Europe is awash with world-class talent eager to make the continent an AI superpower.
There is a lack of clarity here, too. Justifiably, startup founders in particular are worried about how general-purpose AI models will be regulated. What if there is a patchwork of different rules in different member states? Won’t it be easier for the big, wealthy US tech companies to navigate these than smaller businesses whose pockets aren’t so deep? The fear of breaking the rules — and facing hefty penalties — could deter startups from developing and deploying AI. That’s the last thing we want. They’re the ones best placed to move fast and break things.
The defence case here is as strong as the economic one. The global balance of power is shifting, and Europe — as the recent pledge to boost spending to 5% of GDP showed — is acutely aware of its need to rearm. Ask anyone in the defence sector, and they will stress the role that data, software, and technological innovation play now in conflict. AI can’t be divorced from this. The risk here is that we scupper our attempts to develop a modern fighting force capable of keeping peace on the continent and protecting European interests and values. AI is not just one area of the world economy, but the kind of technology that will soon come to underpin almost every sector.
I am not against AI regulation in some shape or form. But I signed the open letter because I believe that we are being far too hasty, and putting at risk, through our eagerness to regulate, the soft power, economic security, technological sophistication, and military strength of our continent.
