Data centers misestimated lied about their carbon footprint. Also about their consumption of resources
post
Climate damage related to AI workloads could exceed $50 billion by 2030
It's a sad state of affairs that even when talking of extinction level threat, it is still quantified in monetary terms. Unsurprising, considering it's written by Allianz.
"Do you know how much money our investors will lose if the human race goes extinct???"
They do an upgrade, ever server/switch/router etc ends up in the dumpster
How many customers do this?
At least here in the Bay Area, hard drives and SSDs get destroyed, but a lot of the other equipment goes to e-waste recyclers who end up refurbishing it and selling it on marketplaces like eBay.
A lot of homelabbers get their equipment from eBay, and the source of that equipment is almost always second-hand data center equipment.
And I would be interested on how they are referbing the equipment and selling for a profit
My understanding is that an e-waste recycling company is contracted to take all the old equipment. The original company can say they've recycled it, record it as such, and doesn't care what's done with the equipment after that - whether that be reselling it, recycling it, whatever. The e-waste company is the one that handles finding the useful stuff and refurbishing it.
The big issue is that there's no risk and hardly any cost to the landfill, while there's a bit of work and thinking required for reuse, with not much more benefit than that it's doing the right thing.
And you don't get to become a capitalist overlord for doing the right thing.
It's high time that tax codes and regulation make dumping e-waste and unsorted trash extremely expensive.
Yeah, that's mostly a regulation/legal incentives situation, combined with lack of education on the side of the execs.
It is possible to sell devices as "defective", even if they aren't defective. That way you don't have warranty or other legal obligations.
Similar story with the "Scrap the whole device for data privacy reasons". That's not a thing. Scrapping the storage media, sure, totally. Scrapping the mainboard, case and power supply? That's crap.
But the main issue is that there's no incentive for companies to reuse devices versus scrapping them. So they scrap the whole thing without regards to anything else, because it's a single decision that requires no further thought und it's cheap enough that it doesn't matter.
If they'd have to pay for full recycling cost, so the cost for actually turning 100% of the device back into usable raw components, then they will instantly start giving those away for free.
or they have devalued to zero so they cannot be sold for tax purposes.
Well that's just stupid. In my country, if you sell property that's been depreciated to zero (or lower than its sale price in general), you're just supposed to record it as profit.
Of course when you've depreciated something to zero and it's not something like a car where it's registered with the government, you could just give it away to employees or friends.
That seems like the perfect department slush fund. Free cookies every friday! Bigger christmas party!
The problem is, few employees or friends will want an enterprise grade server screaming in their house.
The waste described above makes me sad. Surely parts of servers can be recycled.
Even if they are perfectly good
Could that perhaps be an issue of stupid licensing? With, smart licensing, or whatever, if the license is non-transferable, then the hardware is basically an expensive paper weight.
I've heard Cisco used to give out Meraki devices for free on some events, because without a license they were totally useless. Until someone figured out how to run OpenWRT on them.
The amount of waste out there like this is tragic. I could understand destroying hard drives, but the rest of the hardware?
And some people think AI could help solve climate change…
It has shown that there's enough money around we could just tax it and solve our problems collectively. Not sure which height of tax rate would be as devastating for the economy as a bursting AI bubble.
Answer: stop-poll-ut-ting
Hint: Satire
In a sense, we are already at that point. Well... maybe not solve it, but at least slow it down. And maybe not help, but be part of the solution. And that solution is to shut it down.
It can! We just need to train a few more models. I'm sure we'll find one that comes up with the solution!
/s
Killing all humans would solve climate change pretty quickly.
The people who thought data centers bad sides weren't that bad for the environment are the same people who thought Epstein Island was just a nice place for boats to stop for lunch.
I still do not understand why they don’t use heat exchange loops, like we figured out for nukes 75 years ago
Because it's considerably cheaper to do it this way and they're being allowed to do so. Why would they spend money building giant cooling towers when they can just dump the hot water into the river and then drain main supply for fresh supply.
It’s as the case is with everything for these parasites: if it loses them too much money or makes them too little, they avoid it like the plague. It’s cheaper upfront to just run it through an open system.
They usually do. They just do the same thing a lot of nuclear reactors do and also evaporatively cool one end of the heat exchange loop.
As far as I can see they don't ever do it that way, that's the problem, if it was a closed loop they wouldn't be pulling water from the mains and causing water pressure issues for everybody else.
They cool the hot side of the loop with running water, like reactors do, rather than using air.
So the loop is closed, but they're using running water to cool it off faster, rather than needing a bigger radiator on the hot side.
That's not what they're doing though. That would be fine that's just a heat exchanger.
What they are doing is pulling water from the mains to cool the system either directly or to cool an internal system via heat exchanger and then are dumping hot water back into the environment. They're not pumping the water to cooling ponds and letting it cool back down and then pulling the water back out of the cooling ponds to use again.
Hmmm can they … add a turbine?
I thought for a second they're emitting CO2, it's their footprint or the grids energy sources
"Marking ones own homework" is a translation of a proverb in my own language which I found fitting here
Obviously this is bad, but there is definitely some irony in the fact that if the government and all the evil lobbyists that are pushing these data centers would have significantly less issues if they'd actually invested in clean energy earlier like we were all already asking them to years ago.
But instead all that BS about "clean coal" is coming back to bite them in the foot now that they actually want to use that "clean" energy
Wanna bet they didn't ask people with realistic exlectations what they thought emissions would be?
I've been saying for years that the numbers on climate change are always worse than anything you can see or predict
I fucking told you so, dumbfucks. You can kill your masters, or I'm defecting to team apocalypse because I'm sick if the fucking gas lighting, and there's nobody worth saving.

1 comment