I meant more that the % is so low that even if the usage is on top of all other usage (not a completely clear statement to make), it's like starting to mention any other thing in the long tail of technology leaving behind a "massive carbon footprint". Yes, it matters, especially if you were making a report focused on sources of carbon footprint, but in general, saying "AI carbon footprint is bad" just seems like wanting to give it a bad name. In reality AI tech doesn't seem to be such a big contributor percentage-wise. Of course it should still be optimized, not arguing that.
Just because the carrier of energy is source independent, doesn't mean the consumer of that energy is not responsible for the carbon emissions of its production. Since we're talking hundreds of TWh[1], the policies of those consumers can have a massive impact on global emissions.
