"It really seems like anyone with some renders and a white paper written by someone being gassed up by an overly agreeable AI can get VC funding these days."
You wildly underestimate the size of the oceans. If they’re going to be built anyway, and if they can have a long lifespan even in salt water, this would be far better for the environment than the currently popular method of using rivers for cooling - rivers can be warmed by perceptible and significant amounts until they carry that extra heat into the oceans, plus fresh water is more rare, precious, and in need of protection than salt water.
If the heat made by the data centers can warm rivers, and those rivers can warm the oceans… Aren’t the data centers already warming the oceans? Which would mean that putting data centers directly in the ocean would definitely warm the oceans?
Temperature is what matters. The same amount of heat out into a river can significantly warm the whole river downstream, but have no detectable effect on the ocean temperature, just because the heat is diluted so much.
Like, dilute a bottle of tequila with two liters of cola, sure you’ll get drunk - but pour that same tequila into a full swimming pool, and you’d never get drunk even if you drink the pool water all day.
You understand rivers largely empty into oceans, right? Your tequila analogy leaves that part out. Eventually, you’re still dumping tequila (heat) into the pool (ocean).
The effects of heat are all due to temperature, which is reduced by dilution.
The alcohol molecules represent heat energy (Joules), and the ABV% represents temperature (Kelvin).
Rivers are small enough to be negatively affected by data center waste heat, but oceans really aren’t. They are being affected by the greenhouse effect though, because that is on a scale of petawatts, a million times the gigawatt scale of all global data centers together.
I’m far more concerned with the suggested floating datacenters. Just dumping more waste heat into the ocean. WCGW.
If the floating data center is solar powered it wouldn’t actually add any heat that the patch of ocean covered wouldn’t already be getting.
You wildly underestimate the size of the oceans. If they’re going to be built anyway, and if they can have a long lifespan even in salt water, this would be far better for the environment than the currently popular method of using rivers for cooling - rivers can be warmed by perceptible and significant amounts until they carry that extra heat into the oceans, plus fresh water is more rare, precious, and in need of protection than salt water.
If the heat made by the data centers can warm rivers, and those rivers can warm the oceans… Aren’t the data centers already warming the oceans? Which would mean that putting data centers directly in the ocean would definitely warm the oceans?
Temperature is what matters. The same amount of heat out into a river can significantly warm the whole river downstream, but have no detectable effect on the ocean temperature, just because the heat is diluted so much.
Like, dilute a bottle of tequila with two liters of cola, sure you’ll get drunk - but pour that same tequila into a full swimming pool, and you’d never get drunk even if you drink the pool water all day.
You understand rivers largely empty into oceans, right? Your tequila analogy leaves that part out. Eventually, you’re still dumping tequila (heat) into the pool (ocean).
The effects of heat are all due to temperature, which is reduced by dilution.
The alcohol molecules represent heat energy (Joules), and the ABV% represents temperature (Kelvin).
Rivers are small enough to be negatively affected by data center waste heat, but oceans really aren’t. They are being affected by the greenhouse effect though, because that is on a scale of petawatts, a million times the gigawatt scale of all global data centers together.
That space data center might end up dumping more waste into the oceans with all thise launches but certainly more into our atmosphere.