The mask is slipping. Big tech is the biggest energy consumer bar none. You don't need massive cooling if you're not outputting massive heat, and heat is the direct result of energy consumption.
If it has energy it has heat associated with it.
And they'll need ever more energy from here on, so perhaps everyones favorite IT-philantropist could focus on this, instead of stuff out of his particular field of competences?!
Good news though; no water ever escapes the planet, it just displaces to somewhere else..
No water where you're at? - Cool shit chemically - Build shit to endure high temperatures - Have servers and shit "really cloud-based" or orbiting the planet
Build your data center by the great lakes cycle it back dumbasses. Heat homes in winter areas...
It's not rocket science..
Concerning the latter; companies in Denmark are heavily taxed if they reuse excess heat/energy from production, in obvious beneficial ways, which makes absolutely no sence to anybody other than politicians..
This is a concept I have tried to explain to people for a long time.
If climate change were real, and that's a big IF, then CO2 is likely not the cause, the cause is more likely the total amount of energy being used going up so much. Almost all energy used will eventually degrade to heat energy.
From that perspective it makes sense why so many of the political and business leaders are obsessed with population numbers. You can't stop all the people from using energy so decrease the number of people. It's heartless but it makes mathematical sense.
The internet's business model rests on them consuming massive energy. Web traffic is a commodity, the more web traffic the more money, video streaming is huge amounts of information being trafficked. Thus big tech has an incentive in consuming energy, it directly translates to profits, and if they can find a way to not pay big energy their fair share even better.
(post is archived)