3 ms·

US tech firms lobbied EU to keep datacentre emissions secret

83 points by zeristor 6mo ago

michaelsshaw 6mo ago
Waiting for the brigade of HN users crying ablut how EU regulations are "bad for business"
- subscribed 6mo ago
  Exactly. More news at 11.
- wolvoleo 6mo ago
  We don't want datacenters here anyway. They offer almost no economic activity benefits after construction, only low skilled remote hands and security. And they're a huge load on the power grid and cooling water in the area.
  - synotna 6mo ago
    That is incredibly shortsighted Datacenters are means of production, no different than factories Without means of production, you are at the mercy of those with No different than outsourcing manufacturing > huge load on the power grid Then build reliable power plants, ideally ones that aren't turned off every day at 10pm
    - wolvoleo 6mo ago
      But factories employed people. Datacenters hardly do. And whatever there is is low quality menial stuff. Moving boxes, bring told what to do by another low paid engineer in Bangalore. And these datacenters aren't our means of production. They're generally owned by American companies and the proceeds disappear. And yes outsourcing has been a huge negative for society too. It's the groups that have drawn the short straw from this that are now voting extreme right. That's what we get for not looking after the interests of our own workers.
deleted 6mo ago
[deleted]
bob1029 6mo ago
> the pollution that individual datacentres emit This is a reductive framing of the problem. The power grid fuel mix is what determines most of this. There are some cases of on-site generation (which is definitely not ideal), but this can also be addressed with a better grid. You can argue that the data centers shouldn't be built until the grid can catch up, which I think is probably the most defensible argument a Luddite could offer right now. I'd get on board with that one if it was presented rationally. However, it does appear that the environmental arguments are merely a means to and end for some. Quotes like this make it hard to not see the underlying goals.
- GuestFAUniverse 6mo ago
  When the grid is the main factor, what's the problem with providing other metrics like water usage, etc.? Your argument doesn't convince me. Sounds more like lobbying.
  - Ethee 6mo ago
    Is there a problem with providing other metrics like water? I didn't see that mentioned any where in the article. Not to be snarky, but your response kind of reminds me of this famous tweet: https://x.com/AustingrahamZ1/status/1029385497213366279?lang=en https://x.com/AustingrahamZ1/status/1029385497213366279?lang... If you want to talk about water you're obviously free to do so, but you were the one to bring it up. Most of the articles I see about water usage in data centers seems to be propaganda as well. That's not to say data centers aren't consuming more water. I'm sure they are. Considering however that agriculture still accounts for over 70% of overall water usage and we're wasting a lot of it growing things like alfalfa in water hungry regions. Last I'd seen the metric data centers were estimated at around 6%. So I'd argue we should probably look at the worst offenders first.
    - GuestFAUniverse 6mo ago
      Bringing up alfalfa (which is horrible) is the typical whataboutism: wasting water there doesn't make it right to waste fresh water for basically cat pictures and slop. Sprinkling it with dismissing the water issue with "propaganda" and calling agriculture "worst offenders" (seriously? Nourishment is bad and 6% for data centres is insignificant?)... I don't think I can even remotely agree.
ChrisArchitect 6mo ago
More discussion on source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47803745 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47803745

83 points by zeristor 6mo ago

michaelsshaw 6mo ago

Waiting for the brigade of HN users crying ablut how EU regulations are "bad for business"

subscribed 6mo ago
Exactly. More news at 11.
wolvoleo 6mo ago
We don't want datacenters here anyway. They offer almost no economic activity benefits after construction, only low skilled remote hands and security. And they're a huge load on the power grid and cooling water in the area.
- synotna 6mo ago
  That is incredibly shortsighted Datacenters are means of production, no different than factories Without means of production, you are at the mercy of those with No different than outsourcing manufacturing > huge load on the power grid Then build reliable power plants, ideally ones that aren't turned off every day at 10pm
  - wolvoleo 6mo ago
    But factories employed people. Datacenters hardly do. And whatever there is is low quality menial stuff. Moving boxes, bring told what to do by another low paid engineer in Bangalore. And these datacenters aren't our means of production. They're generally owned by American companies and the proceeds disappear. And yes outsourcing has been a huge negative for society too. It's the groups that have drawn the short straw from this that are now voting extreme right. That's what we get for not looking after the interests of our own workers.

deleted 6mo ago

[deleted]

bob1029 6mo ago

> the pollution that individual datacentres emit This is a reductive framing of the problem. The power grid fuel mix is what determines most of this. There are some cases of on-site generation (which is definitely not ideal), but this can also be addressed with a better grid. You can argue that the data centers shouldn't be built until the grid can catch up, which I think is probably the most defensible argument a Luddite could offer right now. I'd get on board with that one if it was presented rationally. However, it does appear that the environmental arguments are merely a means to and end for some. Quotes like this make it hard to not see the underlying goals.

GuestFAUniverse 6mo ago
When the grid is the main factor, what's the problem with providing other metrics like water usage, etc.? Your argument doesn't convince me. Sounds more like lobbying.
- Ethee 6mo ago
  Is there a problem with providing other metrics like water? I didn't see that mentioned any where in the article. Not to be snarky, but your response kind of reminds me of this famous tweet: https://x.com/AustingrahamZ1/status/1029385497213366279?lang=en https://x.com/AustingrahamZ1/status/1029385497213366279?lang... If you want to talk about water you're obviously free to do so, but you were the one to bring it up. Most of the articles I see about water usage in data centers seems to be propaganda as well. That's not to say data centers aren't consuming more water. I'm sure they are. Considering however that agriculture still accounts for over 70% of overall water usage and we're wasting a lot of it growing things like alfalfa in water hungry regions. Last I'd seen the metric data centers were estimated at around 6%. So I'd argue we should probably look at the worst offenders first.
  - GuestFAUniverse 6mo ago
    Bringing up alfalfa (which is horrible) is the typical whataboutism: wasting water there doesn't make it right to waste fresh water for basically cat pictures and slop. Sprinkling it with dismissing the water issue with "propaganda" and calling agriculture "worst offenders" (seriously? Nourishment is bad and 6% for data centres is insignificant?)... I don't think I can even remotely agree.

ChrisArchitect 6mo ago

More discussion on source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47803745 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47803745