Amazon strategised about keeping water use secret

Post by micromacrofoot » Mon, Oct 27, 2025, 4:57 PM UTC

ahmeneeroe-v2 wrote: post #144

micromacrofoot wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this assumes that the needs of both the workers and the owners (who pay for the lobbying) are aligned, and they're often not lobbyists will advocate for taking the water right from under the noses of the workers, and the workers will turn around and praise their employer for maintaining their jobs... it's often some kind of perverse shell game at the end of the day the owners fly off to wherever with a pile of money…

This assumes no such thing.

Post by CGMthrowaway » Mon, Oct 27, 2025, 5:01 PM UTC

amelius wrote: post #179

imgabe wrote: post #10

> noted that it would be harder to reach its internal target if its calculations included “secondary” use—water used in generating the electricity to power its data centres, according to the document. Ok, when we're considering how much water a person uses, are we going to include the water used to grow the almonds you ate? Because agriculture is going to dwarf anything that data centers use.

OK but rain water != tap water.

Post by rcpt » Mon, Oct 27, 2025, 5:03 PM UTC

bitmasher9 wrote: post #138

ahmeneeroe-v2 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Industry advocacy groups ≠ corruption. They're basically necessary to do business in an advanced society that has rules governing every aspect of life. Those rules (even if good) often have unintended consequences and advocacy groups can help ensure that their industries are considered when rule-making.

Lobbying as practiced by these advocacy groups is basically American flavored corruption. If the system were in place anywhere else we’d call it corruption, but it’s our system so we call it Lobbying.

Post by rcpt » Mon, Oct 27, 2025, 5:05 PM UTC

thayne wrote: post #145

lukeschlather wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just for a single point of comparison, California's alfalfa consumes 15% of the state's water. All that alfalfa is going to feed cattle. California only produces 9% of the USA's alfalfa so it's easy to say that this is a tremendous amount of water. Almonds also consume 15% of California's water. But California produces 80% of the world's almonds. We're talking about an order of magnitude difference in water consumpti…

World beef production is approx. 60x almond production by mass, and that doesn't include dairy. That isn't the whole story, because cattle use more water than just what is used to grow alfalfa, but you are comparing apples to oranges here.

Post by Scoundreller » Mon, Oct 27, 2025, 5:11 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #177

bittercynic wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One went in 1/4 mile from my home a couple years ago. I ignored the notices of development because I thought it was far enough that it wouldn't affect me, but it blocks the view of the mountains that I used to enjoy, and sometimes I can hear noise from its cooling system (I assume). I wish I'd known what was coming, and gone to the meetings to oppose it.

Large buildings 1000 feet from you are going to have some impact, but your complaint has little to with being a data center specifically. They could have put in a large warehouse and your view gotten blocked just the same, similarly the noise from the cooling system can be managed well or poorly on any building.