Cost of
a Click
Made AI’s invisible water cost physically tangible — increasing environmental awareness by 85% through sensor-driven experience design.
- Role
- Lead UX Researcher
- Duration
- 10 Weeks
- Team
- UX Researcher · UI Designer · Developer · PM
- Tools
- Figma · Framer · Arduino · VS Code
At a Glance
What role are you targeting?
Experience Designer / UX Researcher
Civic tech, sustainability, or physical-digital interaction design roles.
Is your work relevant to that role?
Sensor-driven experience design
Designed an AI-powered installation that makes water cost felt, not just read.
Can I quickly understand your contribution?
Lead UX Researcher & Designer
Led research, sensor integration design, and the full 10-week experience design process.
Is there evidence of thinking, not just polish?
Abstract stats don't change behavior
Research showed awareness campaigns fail at feeling — so we designed for the felt cost, not the number.
Do outcomes look credible?
Google Summer Impact Grant Winner
Won the Google Summer Impact Grant 2025, demonstrated 85% increase in environmental awareness.
The Problem
AI has a water bill.
Nobody knows.
Every AI query consumes real water to cool data centre servers. In 2025, users type hundreds of prompts a week — with zero awareness of the environmental cost. Abstract facts don’t change behaviour. Felt experience does.
The Cost
One ChatGPT conversation uses ~500ml of water. Most users have no idea.
The Gap
Awareness campaigns fail because the impact is invisible, distant, and abstract.
The Insight
Physical sensation creates emotional memory. If you feel the water drain, you remember it.
Abstract environmental data doesn't change behaviour. But when you watch the water pour — you feel it.
How Might We
How might we make the invisible cost of AI felt — not just understood — so people can make informed choices?
Research Process
Seven phases. One clear arc.
Each phase was sized to the problem — discovery-heavy at the start, refinement-intensive at the close.
Wks 1–2
Discovery
20%
- — Desk research on AI energy use
- — Secondary data synthesis
- — Problem framing
Wks 3–4
User Research
20%
- — 15 semi-structured interviews
- — Survey (n=42)
- — Journey mapping
Wks 5–6
Concept + Design
20%
- — Concept ideation (3 directions)
- — Physical + digital prototyping
- — Figma flows
Wk 7
Build
10%
- — Arduino build
- — Sensor integration
Wk 8
Test R1
10%
- — Lab usability test
- — Iteration
Wk 9
Test R2
10%
- — Field test
- — Refinement
Wk 10
Exhibit
10%
- — DePaul Showcase
- — Impact measure
Design Rationale
Why physical + digital?
The water metaphor
Sensation over Statistics
Watching real water pour proportional to your query creates visceral, embodied understanding — impossible to achieve with a number on a screen.
The dying tree
Visible Consequence
A tree withering on screen as users type creates a real-time cost metaphor — making systemic impact personal and immediate.
Behind the Build
From sensor to experience.
Exhibition
DePaul Summer Showcase 2025
6 Million Views
The internet paid attention.
After the DePaul exhibition, footage of Cost of a Click spread on TikTok and reached 6 million views— sparking a global conversation about AI’s hidden environmental cost.
Originally posted by @thetshegofatso on TikTok · 6M+ views · 2025
Impact
Numbers that moved people.
85%
Awareness Increase
Of participants reported changed awareness of AI's environmental footprint after interacting with the installation.
73%
Behaviour Change Intent
Committed to more mindful AI usage — specifically reducing unnecessary or casual queries.
30%
More Informed Usage
Increase in self-reported informed decision-making about when to use AI tools.
Grant Award · Spring 2025
DePaul Summer Impact Grant — Won
Competitive research grant awarded for the proposal to make AI's environmental cost tangible through experience design.
Exhibition · Summer 2025
DePaul Summer Showcase — Featured Installation
Installation exhibited to students, faculty, and public. 85% awareness increase measured through exit surveys.
Social · Post-exhibition
Viral on TikTok
Exhibition footage circulated widely on social media — extending the research's reach beyond the academic context.
Key Takeaways
What this project taught me.
Felt Told
Physical sensation anchors awareness in a way abstract data never can. Design the experience, not the information.
↑ 85% awareness — felt experience beats data
Research + Build
Combining UX research methods with physical computing required fluency in both domains. The research shaped the hardware decisions as much as the design ones.
Arduino + Figma + field research in one sprint
Test Early, Often
Two rounds of usability testing before exhibition caught critical friction points in the physical interaction — including water spillage, prompt timing, and screen readability.
2 test rounds → 4 critical fixes before launch
Ethics as Design Brief
Designing for environmental awareness means the research itself had to be ethically grounded — consent-first, never alarmist, always actionable.
73% behaviour change intent — actionable framing works
Continuing Research
Now under review for AIES 2026.
Further work on this project has been developed into a research paper, currently under review at the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society.
Cunningham, J. L., Iqbal, S., Nacu, D., Caplan, B., Yerramilli, R., & Mukkamala, D. D. (2026). “Making AI Infrastructure Visible: Interactive Art as a Public-Facing AI Ethics Interface.” AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (AIES 2026).
Paper #343 · Under Review
