this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2023
423 points (96.3% liked)

Technology

59575 readers
3234 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 37 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because that's expensive to build on this scale. They'd have to cool the water back down again.

It's cheaper to just run cold tapwater in at a fast rate, and dump the hot water intothe sewer.

Which is why we need laws that go after industries that use insane amounts of water, if we don't it causes shortages and everyone's rate to go up

[–] Nougat@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago (3 children)

It’s cheaper to just run cold tapwater in at a fast rate, and dump the hot water into the sewer.

There should be a cost to corporations using municipal water supplies for purposes unrelated to direct consumption for drinking, cooking, washing, toilets. You shouldn't be able to use it for cooling only, and you shouldn't be able to bottle and resell it.

[–] MelodiousFunk@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

you shouldn't be able to bottle and resell it.

Dasani and Aquafina in shambles

[–] Noodle07@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Nestlé heavy breathing

[–] brlemworld@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

We should make it exponentially more expensive the more you use.

[–] grahamsz@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There's probably some alternate uses for the heat if these things were well designed. There's some building in denver that is near a major sewer and in the winter they use a heat exchanger to extract that energy and use it to heat the building.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Nah, it's because of the volume.

You don't cool down hot water with the same amount of cool water. You use a shit ton of cool water, because the larger the difference in temps the faster the heat exchange.

So the discharge isn't water that's really hot. It's just warmer than when it went in.

Maybe 5-10 degrees, which is enough for a negative environmental impact if constantly discharged into a lake/ocean/river, but not hot enough to be good for anything.

They could do large underground reserve for cold water, cool their servers with it, then dump it into a second tank that eventually cools and is added to the reserve. It's not complicated, but it is a huge upfront cost.

Companies aren't going to do it when they can pay a fraction of the cost even tho it fucks over everyone else. This is capitalism, we need regulations forcing them to do the right thing over the cheap thing.

[–] grahamsz@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I suppose that's very true. But it could be done - if a data center needs megawatts of cooling and is in an area where buildings need to be heated in the winter, then there should be a legal obligation to not just dump that heat.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Pumping 80 degree water outside of a building in winter isn't going to help anyone...

[–] grahamsz@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago

That's right in the range for subfloor heating, obviously a question of whether or not you can get it somewhere that you need it