321–330 of 450 posts
> In the right geography — somewhere with reliably cool outdoor air Aaahh, there’s the catch. “Save resources on cooling by building your data centre somewhere cold, and pollute the surrounding environment by dumping your waste heat wholesale into that!” Good job Nvidia, I almost thought we had something good there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. The hot water the datacenters dump destroys local ecosystems.
That's interesting...I don't think I've seen the data to support this
But the work is out there, for instance Miara et al. Thermal pollution impacts on rivers and power supply in the Mississippi River watershed, Environ. Res. Lett. 13 034033 (2018)
Worthington et al. The effects of a thermal discharge on the macroinvertebrate community of a large British river: implications for climate change. Hydrobiologia 753, 81–95 (2015)
Lukšienė, Sandström, Lounasheimo, and Andersson. The effects of thermal effluent exposure on the gametogenesis of female fish. Journal of Fish Biology, 56: 37-50 (2000)
Penk and Williams. Thermal Effluents from Power Plants Boost Performance of the Invasive Clam Corbicula Fluminea in Ireland's Largest River. Science of The Total Environment, vol. 693 (2019)
> In the right geography — somewhere with reliably cool outdoor air Aaahh, there’s the catch. “Save resources on cooling by building your data centre somewhere cold, and pollute the surrounding environment by dumping your waste heat wholesale into that!” Good job Nvidia, I almost thought we had something good there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would a citation be needed?
Because we want to understand what impact it is? Residential house emit heat too, but - most of the time - we don't consider them "destroys local ecosystems".. Maybe they do, but we don't treat them as a boolean thing, we try to understand the impact...
You are missing the context of the ecosystem - the topic is water ways. Homes aren't raising the temperature of local waterways which can wipe out entire fish and other aquatic populations while encouraging growth of oxygen depleting organisms and algae. Instead of a river or stream you have a dead stinking waterway.
It was already near zero compared to various other uses. It's always depressing to me to see a lot of effort put in to "solve a problem" (with subsequent fanfare) which is only a PR or image problem in the first place.
"compared to various other uses" You realize how that vague and open ended clause completely undermines any point you are trying to make, right?
> In the right geography — somewhere with reliably cool outdoor air Aaahh, there’s the catch. “Save resources on cooling by building your data centre somewhere cold, and pollute the surrounding environment by dumping your waste heat wholesale into that!” Good job Nvidia, I almost thought we had something good there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even the largest DC doesn't have anywhere near the waste heat of a city.
One of the larger DCs is 7.65 GW on 8000 acres in Texas. It will radiate around 236.3 W/m^2 (compare vs 1000 W/m^2 solar irradiation). This emission continues 24/7/365, while the sun doesn't. So yes, the UHI is real. That plus all the gas turbines powering it which release many tons of gasses. And finally all the infrasound from the DC and its generators have impacts on humans and all creatures for many miles away. O…
"is" is doing a lot of work in that sentence. The data centre doesn't exist.
> In the right geography — somewhere with reliably cool outdoor air Aaahh, there’s the catch. “Save resources on cooling by building your data centre somewhere cold, and pollute the surrounding environment by dumping your waste heat wholesale into that!” Good job Nvidia, I almost thought we had something good there.
Maybe, that's why they want Greenland so bad. Low temperature, many free spaces, no significant nature and if there is one, not enough citizen who can complain. And if they still need water for cooling, there is probably enough from the melting ice they can use.
2. Alaska has all of those things. (Though there's plenty of "significant nature" in both Greenland and Alaska.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Blew my mind living in a Berlin apartment, that the heating & hot water was managed centrally for the entire block (not the apartment block, the whole city block). Too used to Anglo cities where everyone does for themselves.
It makes a lot of sense when there is waste heat. But in places where there isn't, having per house or per apartment block heating unit is preferable because you cut on transmission losses and infrastructure cost