Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

'Thirsty' ChatGPT uses four times more water than previously thought

thetimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 105 posts

Re: 'Thirsty' ChatGPT uses four times more water than previously thought

#31

Post by albertojacini »

MezzoDelCammin wrote: post #20
comboy wrote: post #3

Not sure if that' more than a person sitting in the office writing this when you take into account all electricity used by the building, maintenance, other people (catering cleaning etc.) And I think this energy-shaming whether that's AI crypto or something else is just a wrong approach. If somebody buys energy he can use it for mindless entertainment if he so pleases, why focus on datacenters and not Disneyland?

I think the idea behind energy shaming is that energy price rarely includes its externalities (probably resources depletion and pollution). "If You buy it, You do what You want with it" is of course legally correct. But I think the argument they're trying to make subconsciously in is that there's someone else who will have to pay part of the price for it.

Can be true, but it applies to Disneyland as well.

Re: 'Thirsty' ChatGPT uses four times more water than previously thought

#32

Post by MrMcCall »

thrw42A8N wrote: post #21
MrMcCall wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ChatGPT is not housing anyone, nor is it providing office space. Even Disneyland is at least providing joy for children and adults.

ChatGPT saved 3 hours of my time today.

You are far more energically efficient than a data center.

Wetware >>> software

Re: 'Thirsty' ChatGPT uses four times more water than previously thought

#33

Post by MrMcCall »

volent wrote: post #4

> Many data centres use water-based systems to cool the plant with towers evaporating the heat, like a huge perspiration system, which means that the water is lost. Someone doesn't know what "evaporation" or "lost" means.

Someone doesn't believe in global heating.

Re: 'Thirsty' ChatGPT uses four times more water than previously thought

#34

Post by thrw42A8N »

MrMcCall wrote: post #32
thrw42A8N wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ChatGPT saved 3 hours of my time today.

You are far more energically efficient than a data center. Wetware >>> software

I really am not. I just drank 1 liter of water. ChatGPT consumed several orders of magnitude less doing much more than me. I also just heated up my meal, with meat and fries. ChatGPT didn't need that. All of that while walking around my apartment full of various "useless" stuff. ChatGPT doesn't care.

Re: 'Thirsty' ChatGPT uses four times more water than previously thought

#35

Post by stavros »

MrMcCall wrote: post #17
exe34 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

chat gpt doesn't enjoy anything for itself, it provides value to people. i don't use it much, but on occasion it's been helpful to me.

So do coal-fired power plants. So does our endless production of plastic waste and our ever-growing landfills. So does all our fossil-fuel use. Where is it all taking us, friend? Most people are not honest enough with themself to understand the bigger picture, nor are they selfless enough to give a darn to sacrifice something of their own benefit to help the whole.

Yes, let's all kill ourselves and save resources!

Re: 'Thirsty' ChatGPT uses four times more water than previously thought

#36

Post by mossTechnician »

comboy wrote: post #3

Not sure if that' more than a person sitting in the office writing this when you take into account all electricity used by the building, maintenance, other people (catering cleaning etc.) And I think this energy-shaming whether that's AI crypto or something else is just a wrong approach. If somebody buys energy he can use it for mindless entertainment if he so pleases, why focus on datacenters and not Disneyland?

If "energy-shaming" is a bad practice, why start by mentioning energy consumed by the author of the article?

I think we can leave Disneyland aside and talk about the content of the article, and whether AI companies should receive the gentle treatment they have received: premium access to water, power, and money. Sure, they can buy it, but what about the people who have to absorb the externalities?

Re: 'Thirsty' ChatGPT uses four times more water than previously thought

#37

Post by yallpendantools »

jiggawatts wrote: post #2

The water doesn’t disappear. Most data centres use water in their chiller units, as do many large industrial facilities. ChatGPT is a minority of the energy, heat, and cooling budget of Azure, which is a minority of the world’s data centre footprint. ChatGPT is useful. This article is not.

TFA:

> Many data centres use water-based systems to cool the plant with towers evaporating the heat, like a huge perspiration system, which means that the water is lost.

> All of these companies have schemes to put water back into nature using projects that help river flow, capture rainwater, recharge aquifers and modify dams. They have all pledged to become “water positive” by 2030: returning more than they consume.

> But where are they putting back the water? Quite often it’s not in the same place it was taken out, which can be in areas of “water stress”.

It's not about whether or not the water is gone for good after cooling. It's about allocation of resources. The water cooling ChatGPT servers right now is water not delivered to households or the larger ecosystem. Data centers are, in effect, in competition with the rest of us for who gets to use the water right now.

>> ChatGPT is useful. This article is not.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html please:

> Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.

Re: 'Thirsty' ChatGPT uses four times more water than previously thought

#38

Post by grues-dinner »

Klaster_1 wrote: post #15

More data-center demand means more energy and water demand. Can this in turn incentivize in-situ water reclamation/desalination and energy generation (solar, nuclear), driving down prices for both? Maybe one day, data centers will crystalize cities around them - like mono-cities of USSR, but way more robust. You can even think of these as oasis of some sort!

> data centers will crystalize cities around them

Most datacenter run on pretty small staff sizes.

Every time they announce "new datacenter to bring 4000 jobs", a large proportion of those are in the construction, with only a small fraction being operational staff.

Globally (roughly), there are around 2 million datacenter staff, and 8000 datacenters. 250 people in a huge physical site isn't a good start for a city.

Re: 'Thirsty' ChatGPT uses four times more water than previously thought

#39

Post by fnordpiglet »

AstralStorm wrote: post #19
jiggawatts wrote: post #2

The water doesn’t disappear. Most data centres use water in their chiller units, as do many large industrial facilities. ChatGPT is a minority of the energy, heat, and cooling budget of Azure, which is a minority of the world’s data centre footprint. ChatGPT is useful. This article is not.

Further, it could run on air cooling, just the water or other liquid medium is easier to handle in scale.

Water has better energy transfer characteristics than air, especially during phase changes like evaporation and condensation. So it’s less about scale per se unless you mean scale of energy transfer per unit of time.

Re: 'Thirsty' ChatGPT uses four times more water than previously thought

#40

Post by atoav »

modeless wrote: post #27
MezzoDelCammin wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the idea behind energy shaming is that energy price rarely includes its externalities (probably resources depletion and pollution). "If You buy it, You do what You want with it" is of course legally correct. But I think the argument they're trying to make subconsciously in is that there's someone else who will have to pay part of the price for it.

Water use is not an externality. All water used is paid for.

[citation needed] Nuclear Power plants who use river water in their cooling cycle and pump the (now heated) water back to the river don't pay for that.
Post reply on HN