• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Nah, it’s because of the volume.

    You don’t cool down hot water with the same amount of cool water. You use a shit ton of cool water, because the larger the difference in temps the faster the heat exchange.

    So the discharge isn’t water that’s really hot. It’s just warmer than when it went in.

    Maybe 5-10 degrees, which is enough for a negative environmental impact if constantly discharged into a lake/ocean/river, but not hot enough to be good for anything.

    They could do large underground reserve for cold water, cool their servers with it, then dump it into a second tank that eventually cools and is added to the reserve. It’s not complicated, but it is a huge upfront cost.

    Companies aren’t going to do it when they can pay a fraction of the cost even tho it fucks over everyone else. This is capitalism, we need regulations forcing them to do the right thing over the cheap thing.

    • grahamsz@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I suppose that’s very true. But it could be done - if a data center needs megawatts of cooling and is in an area where buildings need to be heated in the winter, then there should be a legal obligation to not just dump that heat.

        • grahamsz@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s right in the range for subfloor heating, obviously a question of whether or not you can get it somewhere that you need it