Modern "AI" DC's are not cheap and are (for the most part) closed-loop. They don't want to have to spend any more then they have to either and they don't want to pay for a shit load of water if they can avoid it.
Legacy and co-lo DC's are pretty bad about it though.
Source: https://californiawaterblog.com/2026/04/26/ai-water-use-distractions-and-lessons-for-california/
From the post:
>Artificial intelligence (AI) will affect many economic and natural resource sectors as these new technologies develop and mature. We are in the early years of this process. Like most new things, AI has become an object of small and great hopes and fears – from hopes for saving and helping humans to fears for destroying human minds and civilizations. A common concern in the media is AI’s water use and its larger implications. While most AI concerns are speculative in these early days, AI water use is an example of our fears and hopes, as well as how some advocates (and researchers) can seize on public attention as an opportunity for advocacy (and funding).
I work in IT with a niche level of job security and I don't fucking care. Go raise someone else's electric bill you fucking cunts.
The public doesn't know because water usage statistics are opaque on purpose. Big corporations don't want the fall out of publishing that information. True, AI water usage is low compared to other uses, but so what? It sill uses a lot of water better allocated to other uses. That's the whole point. Framing the water usage as low compared to other uses is only rhetoric to stop people from looking at a real problem. Now combine high water usage with electricity rationing and increased costs changes the game. It's no longer one or the other, but both. So they compete with consumers for water and electricity, rising costs. Now I ask, what benefit to consumers? More jobs? No, not really. There is no real tangible benefit to society that offsets higher costs and water consuming electricity demand.
I agree but I also suggest that vegas should not exist and most golf courses should not either. Colorado has a LOT of golf courses.
Golf courses don't compete with consumers for resources other than the land itself. They don't demand utilities build out more infrastructure. Water usage is higher than a household, but not at data center levels. It's also put back into the ground, not evaporated. Also, golf courses must comply with watering bans. Data centers don't.
The golf courses in Colorado do not comply and use the same well water that others in the area do depleting the ground water.
Why is everyone always "but muh golf course"?
