[scrumper]

This water usage argument against data centers is so specious I almost think it's spread as a deliberate talking point by DC proponents.

Power consumption and effect on electricity infrastructure is so, so, so much more consequential and dangerous. It alone is way more than enough on which to base a very solid anti-DC campaign. The water argument weakens the whole anti-DC position by being so refutable.

EDIT: with probable exceptions in specific local instances where water supply is already very constrained, like Utah.

[jsbisviewtiful]

> This water usage argument against data centers is so specious

Conditions for drought have been increasing across the US, including an increase in literal droughts. The ecosystem needs water to survive. We need to give a shit about our water supply. I live in a region that just had a public emergency declared due to drought and our area is upstream on the river that feeds many other states. If we have to watch our water consumption, those other states should be panicking. The power consumption is also a problem, but a lack of water is potentially worse, depending on the circumstances.

[goda90]

We should never assume any aquifer can be used up lightly, whether Utah or in a rainforest. Droughts are going to become more common, and not only does a lower water table impact other human activities, but also plants that have deep roots and anything relying on natural springs that might dry up faster if we're wasting a bunch on evaporative cooling.

Demanding closed loop cooling is just as important as demanding self built renewable power for new data centers.

[whimsicalism]

Just friggin tax carbon. The notion that we pick disfavored new industries and require them to bear the brunt of our renewable buildout is absurd and effectively a tax on the 'new'.

I see no reason we should grandfather in 'heritage carbon emitters' when we are emitting way more than we ought to.

[danaris]

Water isn't carbon.

Leaving aside whether a carbon tax would be an effective solution to CO2 (I genuinely don't know), there's no reason to suspect it would be an effective solution to our water crisis, particularly given the huge growth in solar recently.

Datacenters don't need cooling because they're burning gas for their power. They need cooling because computation produces heat. Even if they were feeding as much clean solar power back into the grid as they were using, we would still need to find a solution to their voracious thirst.

[whimsicalism]

My comment was in reply to the self-built renewable bit at the very end.

In terms of water, I also think that water is severely underpriced for a scarce resource.

[danaris]

The problem with trying to price it is that literally everyone needs it to live. Access to clean drinking water is, and must be, a human right.

We need to find a way to limit its use for profit, while still allowing actual humans who need it to get as much of it as they need.

[whimsicalism]

Ultimately 'profit' is the result of transitive dependencies on things people want fulfill what they are willing to pay for. But I agree that we should subsidize residential water and electricity usage. But the base price before subsidy should reflect the externalities.

[HDThoreaun]

Georgists have figured this out long ago. To make a regressive tax progressive all you need to do is turn the revenue gained from it into a flat per capita tax rebate. Also residential water use is tiny. Maybe your water bill goes up $400 a year but that doesnt matter when you get a $1000 rebate because most of the tax is paid by agriculture.

[goda90]

Pricing water properly includes figuring out how much someone is drawing directly from wells on private property.

[rayiner]

Nah, it's just that most people function based on intuitive, rather than precise, models of how the world works. They have trouble telling millions of gallons apart from billions of gallons. But they were taught through childhood not to leave the water running while brushing their teeth. So the concept of data centers wasting water is intuitively persuasive to them.

I actually have a great deal of respect for the average person. Most of the time, the intuitive model of the world is very good at getting workable answers. But it completely falls apart when something is outside the universe of what people deal with on a day-to-day basis. Try asking the people in your family what the profit margin of a grocery store is. People might go to grocery stores all the time and know exactly how to comparison shop to optimize their spend. But most actually have no idea about the numbers involved at each step of the supply chain. Trying to explain inflation to people over the last few years has been literal hell, because virtually nobody understands the differences between price levels and the first and second derivatives thereof.

[kilroy123]

Didn't OpenAI say they thought it was foreign interference?

Personally, I find it ironic to see people going on and on about data centers on platforms like Threads, Reddit, and X. It's like, do you know where your data is going when you press that button?

[RankingMember]

Sure, but people who use platforms can still advocate against the negative impact of their infrastructure. It's like how participating in an unjust society doesn't negate arguments you make towards bettering it.

[whimsicalism]

I hear that, but of course GPU compute is much more intensive than CPU & SSDs so they are touching on something real.

[loremium]

doesn't mean we won't run out of drinking water in our lifetime

[_DeadFred_]

Everywhere I live water supply has been constrained. Where I live now gets a ton of snow/rain but we have entire subdivisions planned that can't get built because we don't have water hookup/infra capacity, not a shortage of water. Many areas have had water rights changes that have impacted ag/business/homeowners negatively, to the point people aren't allowed to drill wells on their property. And a lot of this is in communities with plenty of water but the water rights has been assigned 'downstream'.

And yet data centers don't seem to be operating under the same rules at a time when people have it shoved in their faces the techbro billionaires and their bought politicians don't have to follow the rules. That people can't get more housing built but somehow billionaires can magically get datacenters is going to cause resentment.

It doesn't help that data centers do everything in secrecy and then just break ground (because they don't want pushback) so it appears that they haven't followed any of the processes everyone else has to (specifically for limited/coveted/people have been waiting years water hookups). This is why they list the number of houses worth of water used. Because that number of housing could have been built instead or now can't be built without upgrading the municipal water system (at huge expense to the local community that already paid to build out the capacity the datacenters took for their remote billionaire owners' enrichment not local community benefit).