• Otter@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    95
    ·
    2 days ago

    It would probably take more energy than we can harvest on earth, considering the sunlight and geothermal energy doesn’t boil it currently.

    I could see it affecting the temperature on local scales, such as the area immediately around the data center.

    • SomeoneSomewhere@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      ·
      2 days ago

      There are a number of 6-8GWe nuclear plants that dump 15+GW into the nearby sea (or in the case of Bruce, Lake Huron). I don’t see it being much of an issue. Better than virtually any other cooling option.

      The issues are maintenance, energy source, and equipment supply.

      • Bev's Dad@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        2 days ago

        The plants on the lakes so monitor the water temp so they don’t affect the ecosystem during the warmer seasons still.

        But I doubt the one in NB had to worry about that when more water flows by it than all the rivers in the world combined.

        But yes, much better source of cooling at the cost of maintenance and equipment. Just like tidal power but with fewer moving parts.

        • sparkyshocks@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          13 hours ago

          The plants on the lakes so monitor the water temp so they don’t affect the ecosystem during the warmer seasons still.

          Yeah, but look at the magnitudes of the heat units involved. Modern nuclear plants generate 0.6-4.5 GW at around 30% thermal efficiency (so they generate between 2-15GW of heat). These underwater data centers are looking at 25 MW (0.025 GW) while surrounded by water in 5 of the 6 3-dimensional directions.

          There is some risk to local ecosystems, but we’re literally talking 2 or more orders of magnitude difference compared to nuclear plants or other thermal plants.

    • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 day ago

      I don’t think people mean literally boil the ocean. Just increasing it by few Celsius degrees can be world ending.

      • thedormantotaku@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        16 hours ago

        The specific heat capacity of water is 4200J/kg. Raising the temperature of ocean water by quite a few degrees is also very improbable.

      • Otter@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        That’s true, but I still don’t think we can raise ocean temperatures through direct cooling and renewable sources the way that the greenhouse effect can. Water can absorb a lot of heat energy without changing temperature, and that is why regions close to oceans have a more temperate climate.

        While I don’t have enough knowledge in this field to be making any definitive statements, my logic is as follows:

        • outside of nuclear fission/fusion reactions, heat energy on the earth’s surface comes from either the sun or molten rock in the core
        • that energy is responsible for everything that happens on earth, including wind energy

        So we would need to get energy from off planet, use nuclear fission/fusion, or cover enough of the land area in wind and solar farms in order to redirect the sun’s energy over to the oceans.

        I think the bigger concern, when it comes to heating the ocean, is that manufacturing, construction, and transport related to the data centers still releases a lot of greenhouse gases. Those gases trap the sun’s energy within our atmosphere and that WILL heat up the earth. Way more than direct cooling using ocean water.

        • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          I’m a scuba diver and you can definitely harm regions of ocean with water pumps. It’s already happening in place where nuclear is being cooled. It’s already happening in ship yards.

          It’s hard to speculate how it would happen at scale though because ocean science is real fucking hard and each location is vastly different. In populated places the damage would be very noticeable if not eventually catastrophic as ocean issues compound real fast as the ecosystem is much more fluid.

          That being said I imagine there would be ways to deploy this safely (ocean is big, lots of boring dead space) but I dont have trust in us to find this way.

      • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        If every data centre was passively cooled in the ocean it wouldn’t change temps by even 0.01 degrees. The Sun blasts an entire half of the planet with an absurd amount of energy every day. Energy, which technically originated from the sun, is just converted and being utilized to do work.

        • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Not the same thing. The sun doesn’t concentrate the power in already hifhly populated gulfs and bays where these would be. We’re not building something in the middle of Atlantic Ocean.

    • melfie@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 days ago

      Good point, although on the local scale you mention, wildlife could still be impacted. Hopefully, the overall impact on the ecosystem will be monitored and studied before expanding these data centers more broadly.