Yeah, great because ocean habitat already straining from warming oceans are going to love having AI that produces nothing but hallucinations and pron heat up the waters even more.
Technology
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
So this is how we boil the oceans? With fucking underwater AI data centers. Definitely not on my bingo card
Still, FUCK AI.
How many AI datacenters will it take to boil the ocean?
It would probably take more energy than we can harvest on earth, considering the sunlight and geothermal energy doesn't boil it currently.
I could see it affecting the temperature on local scales, such as the area immediately around the data center.
There are a number of 6-8GWe nuclear plants that dump 15+GW into the nearby sea (or in the case of Bruce, into Lake Huron). I don't see it being much of an issue. Better than virtually any other cooling option.
The issues are maintenance, energy source, and equipment supply.
The plants on the lakes so monitor the water temp so they don't affect the ecosystem during the warmer seasons still.
But I doubt the one in NB had to worry about that when more water flows by it than all the rivers in the world combined.
But yes, much better source of cooling at the cost of maintenance and equipment. Just like tidal power but with fewer moving parts.
If it's being powered by wind, it's not adding additional energy to the environment, at all. It all comes down to conservation of energy, and no chemical changes are occurring.
Electrical energy is being generated by harvesting kinetic energy in the wind, that's essentially just moving energy, converting it from one form to another. Energy can be swapped and converted around, but in the end, it almost always ends up turning into heat or light.
That wind, one way or another was going to convert its energy into heat. Most often it does that by convection, causing water vapor in the air to change state, after condensing, the now warmer water release its heat into the ocean when it falls as rain.
Turning a wind turbine to generate electricity, to run computers, is a much more elaborate route to take, but the result is the same. The wind is moving slower, a lower energy state, but the ocean is warmer, a higher energy state. It all evens out.
Edit: I just realized, that sometimes that kinetic energy from wind contributes to storms and sometimes those storms generate lightning, and while most of the energy from lightning does turn into heat, some of that energy generates light, and some of that light shoots out into space (actually escaping the earth). So probably, higher wind speeds do result in cooling the earth a very little bit (not it's likely negligible)
What will this do to the local ocean ecosystems?
China dishes care. The US doesn't care.
People care... But who are we? What do we matter?
Great, let's boil the ocean faster.
Let's boil the ocean everyone.
This makes me wonder what is better - underwater DCs heating the oceans, or above water ones with all the pollution creating and water sucking cooling instead. Part of me thinks the underwater one might be better.
The issue with climate change was never with "heat production". It's always been the generation of heat trapping chemicals. The sun sends a stupid amount of energy our way. Generally the earth radiates almost the same amount back out into space, with a minor amount captured by various things, like photosynthesis.
Pollution alters that equation and causes more energy from the sun to get trapped in the atmosphere. That's the problem. We could never generate as much energy as the sun (even the tiny amount that hits the earth), but we can definitely alter the atmosphere to trap more and more of that heat.
Also, the ocean is a MASSIVE heat sink. I saw someone work out the calculations recently, I don't remember the numbers, but the conclusion was that we'd never measure a notable increase in ocean temps if we housed every datacentre in existence in the ocean. The sun hitting the ocean every day dumps more energy into the ocean directly than we'd ever be able to manage.
It all comes down to pollution.
If you take local temperatures of the ocean at different latitudes, they won't all be the mean temperature of the ocean. It isn't a single massive heat sink.
Data centers raise nearby temperatures by up to 4 degrees in Phoenix
That's true, but water is so much more effective at absorbing heat than air, the effect will be negligible. It takes about 4.2 megajoules to raise one cubic meter of water 1 degree C. That energy would raise over 3 cubic KILOMETERS of air 1 degree C.
Even putting data centers at the bottom of large lakes would be unlikely to have an effect. It will not be percetable in the ocean. Regarding temperature anyway, other factors are worth considering.
The total effect is negligible, but even with high conductivity, local impact could be destructive enough. Even with an infinitely large copper pan, I wouldn't put my hand on the part that's on a stove's burner.
That's true, but the impact will be very very local. Really, we just need to have fewer data centers, but at least by putting them in the ocean we are only impactfully warming probably less than 300 cubic meters of water instead of an entire neighborhood, or depleting groundwater to cool the damn things. Seems like the least harmful way to cool them, if we're going to have them.
Yeah, fully agree.
But that's true no matter where you put the data center. If you have to dump the waste heat somewhere, the high density and specific heat of water is a better heatsink than the air around us.
sudo systemctl poweroff
OH FUCK I was in an ssh session!
*Puts on scuba gear
So salt water can be used!? 🤔
You can also just use air
If you have access to it. Unfortunately, most of them are setting up in drought ridden deserts. They'll be fighting Nestlé for the last drops pretty quickly.
This is pretty impressive. If only China had a good human rights record. But then again there's only a few countries that do and none of them are superpowers.
So there's a non-zero chance we will find out later that it's just a bathysphere full of children doing math.
Okay, who had the bright idea of boiling the ocean to make soup?
God, the insane amount of energy it would take to even remotely measure a difference in the ocean water is astronomical. You might be able to cause some small impact in a relatively small radius that could impact wildlife, but I feel like there are open enough areas that not much would be impacted in the area.
I'd really like to know how they handle all the small-scale HW issues. As a DC tech, I'm kept quite busy with those
I bet they duplicate everything and just switch off faulty units. Every year or so, they would emerge the whole thing and replace what they need at a large scale.
China: "We will use the oceans water". usa: "We will use the citizens drinking water".
If only the US had a coastline.
So when do we start putting big ice cubes in the ocean?
(Really this at least makes more sense then land slop centers, still silly)