An independent statistical observatory. Not affiliated with any government agency.Series AIB-1 · Revised daily at 00:00 UTC · Sources refreshed 2026-09-10
AI Burn ClockIndex of the cost of retrieval by reading in AI systems

AI Burn Clock › National release › 2026-09-10

Statistical release · Series AIB-1 · National

Cost of retrieval by reading in AI systems: national release, September 10, 2026

AI agents read up to 47 times more than they use. This release prices the habit, applies the price to the budgets that organisations and governments have published, and shows the three steps that end it.

Released 2026-09-10 00:00 UTCNext release 2026-09-11Frequency dailyMethod version 2026.1Data data.jsonContact [email protected]
Contents
  1. Main points
  2. Your organisation
  3. Table 1 · Reported AI spending, by sector and organisation
  4. Table 2 · Cost of one answer, measured
  5. Table 3 · By team size
  6. Chart 1 · Ten-year projection
  7. Table 4 · By state
  8. Tables 5 and 6 · Agencies and recipients
  9. Reference figures
  10. The remedy
  11. Technical note
  12. Data, embed and press
  13. Notes and contact

1Main points

$0
Avoidable reading since you opened this page
World scenario at the reference factors: every second
Avoidable reading, world scenario, 2026
6.3 % of $2.59T worldwide AI spending (Gartner, May 2026); factors B1 to B3
47×
Bytes read against bytes used, measured
Worst of three answers on a production codebase; the best was 16× (Table 2)
U.S. federal agencies, scenario, per year
On $7.2B of federal AI obligations in 2026 (Brookings); labelled contracts to date: $427.8M
Customers of one vendor, scenario, per year
On Anthropic's $65B revenue run rate, July 2026 (CNBC)
$40.084T
Total public debt, for scale
Treasury, Debt to the Penny, live at the mean rate of the last 30 records; not attributed to any cost on this page
  • An AI agent that finds information by reading whole files loads 16 to 47 times more bytes than the answer needs, measured on three ordinary questions on a production codebase (Table 2). On published coding tasks, retrieval-first cuts tokens 2.7 times end to end.
  • Applied to worldwide AI spending, the reference factors put avoidable reading at in 2026, every second: money paid for text nobody needed (Technical note, item B).
  • Applied to reported budgets: a year for U.S. federal agencies on $7.2 billion of AI obligations, for JPMorgan Chase on $2 billion, across the customers of one vendor with a $65 billion run rate (Table 1).
  • Federal prime contracts naming AI total $427.8M for fiscal year 2026 to date, a labelled floor of the Brookings figure; every state has a dated release with its own dateline (Table 4).
  • The habit ends with a local index that answers "where is it" before the agent reads: open source, four commands, nothing leaves the building (section 10).

How the cost is cut, in three steps

  1. Index once. A local engine reads the folder one time and builds a card index on the agent's own machine. One command; nothing leaves the building.
  2. Ask "where" first. The agent asks the index and gets the file, the line and the symbol back in milliseconds instead of opening files to look.
  3. Read only that. It reads the passage the pointer names. Measured: 103 KB became 6 KB, 244 KB became 6 KB, 242 KB became 5 KB.

First release of this series; the change line begins with the next one.

2Your organisation

Pick a published budget or type your own. The result applies the same three factors as the world scenario; each is a control under the Technical note. Nothing you type leaves the page.

Table 1Reported AI spending and usage, by sector and organisation, with the avoidable share

Public disclosures, each linked to its source, and what the index's reference factors imply for each. B1·B2·B3 for a general AI budget (inference share × agent share × avoidable share = 6.3 %); B2·B3 for vendor revenue, which is already customer spending on tokens (25.2 %); B3 alone for a coding-agent product, where the whole figure is agents reading code (63 %); none for infrastructure and prices. Move a factor under the Technical note and the column recomputes.

SectorOrganisationReported figureWhat it measuresFactorsAvoidable reading, scenarioSource

Score cards measured with the plugin and published by organisations themselves will appear as a separate row group, dated, only with written permission ([email protected]). None yet. The list is public: data/disclosures.json.

Table 2Cost of one answer, by retrieval method, measured

Three ordinary questions put to an agent on one production Next.js codebase, September 2026. "Read" is the size of the whole files behind the answer, which a grep-and-read agent loads into its context; "Index" is what the same agent read when a local index answered first.

QuestionRead, whole filesRead, via indexRatioCost at $3 / M tokens, old way
Where is the payment webhook signature verified?103,023 B6,405 B16×$0.077
How does an owner cancel a subscription?243,640 B6,389 B38×$0.183
What happens when a dish photo is uploaded?241,859 B5,101 B47×$0.181

Tokens ≈ bytes / 4. A published case study on real coding tasks reports 2.7× fewer output tokens end to end; this release uses the conservative 1 − 1/2.7 = 63 % as the avoidable share, not the 94–98 % above.

Table 3Estimated annual cost of retrieval by reading, by team size

Select a row to set Chart 1. Reading bill = developers × requests per day × working days × tokens read per request × price per million tokens. Avoidable = reading bill × avoidable share.

TeamTokens read per yearReading bill, yearAvoidable, yearAvoidable, monthSenior engineers it would pay

Reference parameters: . Adjust under Technical note, item A. Last column: avoidable cost divided by $185,000, a reference fully loaded cost of one senior engineer in the United States.

Chart 1Ten-year projection of the reading bill, two methods

Growth starts at the Gartner 2026 rate for worldwide AI spending and tapers to the long-run parameter. The shaded area is the gap: what is read and paid for without being needed.

Projection of the selected team's reading bill. Assumptions in Technical note, items A and B.

Table 4Federal contract obligations naming AI, by state of performance, FY2026 to date

Prime contracts whose descriptions name artificial intelligence, machine learning or language models. USAspending.gov, refreshed daily. A floor, not a total: AI work inside larger contracts is usually unlabelled. State debt at end of fiscal year 2023 from the Census Bureau's Annual Survey of State Government Finances, shown for scale. Each state has its own release page and a press release datelined at the state capital.

#StateObligationsPer residentShare of USState debt, FY2023

All 51 jurisdictions with the scenario column: state releases.

Tables 5 and 6Awarding agencies and recipients, same filter

Table 5. Awarding agencies, FY2026 to date
AgencyObligated
Table 6. Recipients, FY2026 to date
RecipientObligated

Reference figuresShown as published, for scale

Official series reproduced without adjustment. They size the environment in which the cost above is incurred; nothing on this page attributes them to it.

SeriesValueSource and note
Total public debt outstanding$40.084TTreasury, Debt to the Penny, as of ; on-screen figure advances at the mean rate of the last 30 records.
Federal contracts naming AI, FY2026 to date$427.8MUSAspending.gov; keyword filter listed in the Technical note. FY2025 full year: $615.5M. Brookings puts total federal AI obligations for 2026 at $7.2B.
Worldwide AI spending, 2026 forecast$2.59TGartner, May 2026; +47 % year on year. Base of the world scenario and first-year growth rate of Chart 1.
World scenario, avoidable readingSince this page was opened; per second at the reference factors (Technical note, item B). Scenario, not a measurement.

The remedyA local index that answers "where" before the agent reads

The cost above has one cause and one cure. An agent that needs one function finds it by reading whole files; a local index on the agent's own machine answers "where is it" first, and the agent reads only the passage. The habit is called retrieval-first, and it is what Table 2 measured.

The implementation measured

XERJ is an open-source local search engine for AI agents: one Rust binary, Elasticsearch-compatible on port 9200, indexes any folder in one command, returns passages and pointers, keeps agent memory, speaks MCP. Apache-2.0. Source on GitHub · instructions for an agent.

curl -fsSL https://xerj.org/get | sh
xerj --insecure --data-dir ./.xerj-data &
xerj autoindex .
xerj search "the question you were about to grep"

Measure it on your own machine

The xerj-memory plugin for Claude Code adds XERJ as local memory and prints a score card at the end of every session, with an image to post. The offline agent answers questions about your code with the network cable unplugged: XERJ as memory, an open model as the brain.

Technical noteEstimation method and parameters

Item A sets the team estimate (Table 3, Chart 1). Item B sets the world scenario, Table 1 and the figures in Main points. Every default carries its source; every control is yours. The full note, with what the index does not claim, is on the technical note page.

An agent working through a task issues dozens of tool calls; 40 is an ordinary day.
Table 2 measured 103–244 KB per answer. Tokens ≈ bytes / 4.
2026 list prices run from under a dollar for small models to fifteen for frontier models.
Unattended overnight agents push this to 365.

Data, embed and pressFor newsrooms, offices and teams

Embed the live figure

<script src="https://aiburnclock.org/embed.js" data-scope="world"></script>
<script src="https://aiburnclock.org/embed.js" data-state="TX"></script>

A 300 × 120 counter with a link back. Machine-readable release: /data.json, refreshed daily. Pipeline and templates: GitHub.

Notes and contactSources, limits, corrections