当前，人工智能（AI）被视为学术界内外可持续发展的“变革者”。为了讨论可持续人工智能，本文借鉴了批判数据与算法研究、科学技术与社会学（STS）、转型可持续科学、批判计算机科学以及公共利益理论的见解。我主张尽管人工智能确实存在许多与可持续发展相关的应用场景，但其总体弊端可能多于益处。为支持这一论点，我区分了人工智能供应链的三种“物质性”：首先是物质层面（如水、钴、锂、能源消耗等），其次是信息层面（如大量数据和集中控制的需求），第三是社会层面（如剥削性的数据工作、社区因废物和污染而受到的危害）。在所有这些物质性方面，对全球南方的影响尤为毁灭性，而全球北方则从中受益。关于可持续人工智能的另一个重要观点涉及所谓的非政治化优化（例如城市交通优化），然而，优化标准（如汽车、自行车、排放、通勤时间、健康等）本质上是政治性的，必须在应用人工智能优化之前通过集体协商确定。因此，从原则上讲，可持续人工智能无法突破转型的玻璃天花板，甚至可能分散必要的社会变革的关注点。为解决这一问题，我建议停止“无信息收集”，并采用“小即是美”的原则。这旨在为如何（不）将人工智能整合到可持续发展项目中贡献学术和集体协商，同时避免通过服务于有用的人工智能应用场景、技术乌托邦救赎叙事、技术中心效率范式、人工智能的剥削性和掠夺性特征以及数字去增长概念来延续现状。

Artificial intelligence (AI) is currently considered a sustainability "game-changer" within and outside of academia. In order to discuss sustainable AI this article draws from insights by critical data and algorithm studies, STS, transformative sustainability science, critical computer science, and public interest theory. I argue that while there are indeed many sustainability-related use cases for AI, they are likely to have more overall drawbacks than benefits. To substantiate this claim, I differentiate three 'AI materialities' of the AI supply chain: first the literal materiality (e.g. water, cobalt, lithium, energy consumption etc.), second, the informational materiality (e.g. lots of data and centralised control necessary), and third, the social materiality (e.g. exploitative data work, communities harm by waste and pollution). In all materialities, effects are especially devastating for the global south while benefiting the global north. A second strong claim regarding sustainable AI circles around so called apolitical optimisation (e.g. regarding city traffic), however the optimisation criteria (e.g. cars, bikes, emissions, commute time, health) are purely political and have to be collectively negotiated before applying AI optimisation. Hence, sustainable AI, in principle, cannot break the glass ceiling of transformation and might even distract from necessary societal change. To address that I propose to stop 'unformation gathering' and to apply the 'small is beautiful' principle. This aims to contribute to an informed academic and collective negotiation on how to (not) integrate AI into the sustainability project while avoiding to reproduce the status quo by serving hegemonic interests between useful AI use cases, techno-utopian salvation narratives, technology-centred efficiency paradigms, the exploitative and extractivist character of AI and concepts of digital degrowth.