Original comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1uyyywv/comment/oy3cgd7/
Trees vs. Data Centers
Photo 1: Memphis, TN (top)
Photo 2: Sandston, VA
Photo 3: Abilene, Texas
Photo 4: New Albany, OH
Photo 5: Fayetteville, GA
There’s all this talk of solar-powered space-based orbital data centers , but they can’t be bothered to put up cheaper, simpler, grid-relieving ground-based solar, on the real estate they’ve already got, when that would start producing some juice like right now? How does this make any sense?
Because solar on the roof won’t even be noticable against their power footprint. Given current practices, each square foot of a datacenter would need about 1,000 times more square footage worth of solar.
It’s just that somehow if they get to go to space, they decide they suddenly just need like two servers in a ‘datacenter’ instead of thousands. And they need to go to space because Elon says (checks notes) that it’s too hard to make more natural gas turbine parts…
Because solar on the roof won’t even be noticable against their power footprint. Given current practices, each square foot of a datacenter would need about 1,000 times more square footage worth of solar.
But (as I’m sure you realize) this would mean every watt from on-premises solar could get put to use immediately, no batteries, no power-grid buy-back schemes. Making those solar panels an unusually good investment.
Unless they’re not planning to keep it running for very long.
It smells un-serious, somehow.
Even if it’s nowhere near a majority of the power, I’m surprised passive cooling from solar plus some electricity isn’t worthwhile enough to be universal. It’s a small impact, but also cheap enough it’ll pay for itself, and many orders of magnitude more efficient than trying to get a datacenter into space, and figure out how to cool it
Especially since they’re looking for space for solar installations, farmers have started installing them, power companies and coops. Seems financially stupid to leave that much space unused when solar farms would go right on top.
And especially because elon owns a solar panels company and he loves to transfer money between his companies
Just like vaccines, some things need to be done in scale to reach their true effectiveness.
That one facility will always be as net negative for the grid. But with panels on all the other buildings in the area that aren’t a power sap, it would be significantly better.
We’re getting to the point where roof top solar is relatively cheap and worth the effort. I mean, there’s fucking fields near me that they clear cut and put ground based solar panels on, and it was profitable enough for the farmers to lease the land, and the company that owns the panels to get their nut. And a lot of those field based panel arrays are equivalent to, if not smaller than the massive Amazon warehouses we have nearby.
If large corporations pay their fucking taxes and did their fair share of infrastructure investment we wouldn’t even be having a conversation about global warming or about where we’re going to get energy for fucking stupid worthless data centers. The energy is in the fucking sky it’s free goddamn giant nuclear reactor you just need to put panels on top of shit to harvest it.
At this point in climate change time, it is criminal neglect to 1. clear a forest, 2. build a big steel/concrete box on it and then 3. don’t even put a green roof or solar roof. We need to be heading towards climate trials and people deciding this crap today still in companies with a near infinite capital available deserve life in jail without airco.
As long as they continue to spout pie-in-the-sky for-realsies gonna-be-fantastic totally-not-gonna-fall-apart-like-half-Elon’s-schemes plans for the future, they don’t have to spend ANY money on stuff like ground-based solar panel arrays, and they get more investors who get suckered by the pitch too!
Solar panels produce 36.6% more energy in space than on earth at noon with ideal atmospheric conditions (clear sky). As it’s not always clear and not always day on earth, so I suspect the difference to be 300-400%, plus storage inconvenience.
Devils advocate, I don’t agree with this, but maybe because first to market and innovating quickly gets more money? The solar panels would be a bigger up front cost (they gotta make sure the building is rated for it, buy a bunch of wires if it’s out in a field, etc) than just paying the city for 6 months-3 years of electricity vs how much the return will be in the timed bubble we have?
I don’t think that’s a good business decision unless you think what you’re making isn’t going to last…. But maybe they know the bubble will pop and don’t wanna invest long term? It’s just dumb or evil.
The roof might be used for cooling, which is probably be a better use of space for a datacenter roof.
To be fair. This isn’t an AI issue. Or a data center issue. It’s an everywhere issue. If there is a plot of land, it will be leveled and something will be built. Strip mall. Gas station. Houses. So many houses. It’s never ending. If that piece of land can make money, it will be clear cut and built on.
The use of passive voice throughout your comment is almost impressive.
What do those other buildings provide that data centers don’t?
I get what you are saying. I know. But that strip mall is gonna have a parking lot the size Montana. It will contain 2 mattress stores, a noodle place and a denture store. The noodle place will go out of business and shutdown. The other 3 will remain open for the next 12 years by magic or something, cause you never see a single person there. We need housing yes. Affordable housing. The houses that the forest was cleared for will be 500k plus, contractor grade, where you get to choose from 3 designs, and its built off a two lane road that is never improved to handle a 1000 home neighborhood. At least, that is all that is popping up around me.
Id rather have the forest any day.
Not OP, but houses provide housing. Strip malls provide spaces for local businesses. Data center literally provide nothing to the local community they are built in other than stress on existing utilities. It’s not like factories of yore where 1k jobs would be created and lives were built around it.
Winner, winner, chicken dinner!
Haha yeah that’s exactly what I was getting at.
I wouldn’t really categorize rampant ecological destruction as something calling for merely mild annoyance
There is no greater threat to humanity, than humanity itself. There is so much evidence of this throughout history, and yet we have collectively learnt nothing from it. As a species, we are the most destructive force in existence, and time and time again the value of the almighty dollar, that we ourselves have created, is put first above all else. Even the existence of the only known planet that we can successively survive on, is put behind the priority of the dollar.
On the plus side, at least there’s no bloody rain in Melbourne this weekend!
at least there’s no bloody rain in Melbourne this weekend!
I should hope there’s no bloody rain…
(Sorry not sorry I had to. I needed a chuckle)
To me, the problem seems to be bad regulators. They could have mandated that data centers have solar panels on their roof. They could have mandated a certain amount of greenery around the warehouse, so that the area was less impactful. It’s been a known issue that unregulated Capitalism will cause mass destruction quite frequently for decades if not centuries. You can’t expect every business to ‘do the right thing’ every time…that would be stupidly optimistic of regulators.
Honestly amazing that these tech companies are able to make a building full of computers look like an open strip mine. They don’t even try to beautify the campuses or anything, just bare dirt and ponds full of acrid water. I live in taconite country and have seen active mining operations put in more care for the communities they invade then big tech does
I don’t agree with how data centers are being built out, but I also don’t think your assessment is accurate. The New Albany and Fayetteville sites look to preserve most of the existing trees. Abilene and Sandstone appear to be active construction.
Some day, the people may rise up… And maybe all of these will burn.
I like to think the employees will do it. Who knows, though…
I just know it needs to be done.
the people can just stop using the services to get rid of these. there is no need to get violent lol
Are these places extremely patrolled and secure? I’m just surprised people aren’t burning them to the ground or disrupting them some way or somehow
Yep. I’ve been to a Facebook one and they had us hand in our IDs at the check-in.
It’s a bit unfortunate the second xAI is taken in the winter, so we can’t really see how much of the trees are gone, but looks like a lot.
Just zoom I’m, you can see where it is bare ground and how winter pic still has trees in the other areas. Don’t go just by colour itself but the shapes of the masses
I can’t tell from this far away, but if those trees are deciduous then they lose their leaves in the cold weather
So a winter photo might not be as good of a comparison as a summer photo because even if there were exactly as many trees in each photo, the winter one would look like there are fewer.
In that region they typically hold on to their leaves and they slowly come off but keep most of it through the winter, depending on wind to blow them off.
You can still see the trees on the left and the right 🤔 like outer border is identical, just a swath cut through the middle. Season can have an effect but it seems pretty clear here.
Summer vs winter picture, not a very honest take
It would look the same for any commercial building - a warehouse, shopping center (would be even worse), etc.
No need to be disingenuous, it just weakens the argument and gives someone who disagrees with you valid ammunition.
Housing developments and apartment blocks are built on former forests in a similar timeframe too
At least here in the US the people arguing against data centers are also against housing developments and want to reduce urban sprawl (by say tearing down all the empty malls and building apartments there for example). At least that’s what it seems like to me, someone against the never ending suburbia.
Summer vs winter picture, not a very honest take
How so? Not like the data center will wilted away after the winter and trees grow back on spring.
I guess the point would be what does the local area get in exchange for losing their forest?
A lot of other developments at least provide the local populace some service or jobs. These are just “give me your land, your power, and water and we will use it to advance our business interests and do nothing for the locals”, oh and btw, give us a tax break for the privilege of having us build a datacenter in your area.
Now I’m being bombarded by ads saying ‘um, actually datacenters give you tons of permanent jobs and makes power cheaper’, so they are just flat out lying instead of actually doing anything to make it worth the local community. Well, except key people on local town councils who somehow end up with NDAs forbidding them from disclosing what conversations they are having with these developers…
