5 ms·
Is it really true that datacenters use freshwater once and then just discharge it to sewer? If so, the criticism of cloud companies (including but not limited t
by krasin 3y ago
Is it really true that datacenters use freshwater once and then just discharge it to sewer? If so, the criticism of cloud companies (including but not limited to Microsoft) is valid. Especially that it's reasonably straightforward to build a fully-enclosed system, possibly requiring to incur a one-off capital expense to build a dry cooling tower ([1])
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooling_tower https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooling_tower
- MilStdJunkie 3y agoIIUC, evaporative cooling is capable of far, far, far greater cooling capacity per unit of flow. I can't speak to all datacenters everywhere, but the one I did work with had astonishing water usage, as the water was vaporized as it absorbed the thermal energy, the gas conveniently full of all that extra molecular wigglin' and shakin'. Getting the water back via condensation, can't really do that in quantities that match the heat, not without spending another big pile of energy. No free lunch I guess. You have an analogue in weapons design, as this is one of the big reasons we haven't seen caseless ammunition. The case - in addition to providing a hot seal for the high pressure gas - also is an absolutely amazing heat sink, ejecting all that thermal mass right out the top of the weapon. Caseless ammo, the breech, barrel, bolt . . honestly, the wholy weapon - gets real hot real fast, exacerbated by the fact that now, with no case, everything has to have tight seals.
- falsenapkin 3y agoI don't think this addresses the comment you're replying to. Sure evaporative is more effective, I don't see an argument against that, but I think the point of GP is that fully enclosed (like a dry cooling tower) is possible and we can be critical of these companies for not doing the arguably more responsible/moral thing.
- john-radio 3y agoYeah, the "oh well, it's evaporated already, so no getting it back without spending even more energy" tack of the post that you're responding to to is insane. That's not how water cooling works!
- strken 3y agoIs it more responsible to waste electricity and save water? That sounds like a damned if you do, damned if you don't trade-off between two bad things, not a clear good vs bad choice. My understanding is that a closed cooling tower uses more energy because evaporation is so much better than radiation at removing heat.
- krasin 3y ago1) It should be possible to build a mostly passive dry cooling tower. It will cost more to build, but the cloud companies are not particularly struggling. 2) Electricity is much more portable than water. Droughts are regional and there's little that can be done about it (other than avoiding waste), but electricity can be and often is transferred from out of state. And we do have a lot of solar+wind power nowadays, should be a good fit for cooling.
- nyrikki 3y agoMicrosoft mainly uses adiabatic cooling today in the US, the water is evaporated not dumped in the sewer. https://datacenters.microsoft.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Azure_Modern-Datacenter-Cooling_Infographic.pdf https://datacenters.microsoft.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05...
- krasin 3y agoThanks. That's a little better, because it has a higher chance of turning back to rain somewhere around (or at least making air a little more moist).
- nyrikki 3y agoIt won't rain where it is being used, Florida getting the rain from Arizona evaporation doesn't help out the Colorado basin.
- krasin 3y agoI agree. Which is why full water recirculation for datacenter cooling should probably be a law.
- Dylan16807 3y agoIt should work out a lot better, because 25C of cooling only requires you to lose 5% of the water per loop.
- krasin 3y agoIf the end result is a lot of freshwater lost, it's still very bad.
- Dylan16807 3y agoThe end result is 1/20th as much lost. So if that's still "very bad" then the other plan is "catastrophic". It's a very big improvement.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]