Thread

1. 1-6 · 1791145424 · focus · HN ↗

   You can get better cooling performance at the cost of slight water usage or you can use more energy without using water at all.

   The greener solution is to use water.

   1. XMPPwocky · 1791145834 · focus · HN ↗

      Seems like it'd depend a lot on e.g. carbon impact of the marginal watt v.s. environmental impact of the marginal gallon? Might depend on the individual site.

      1. fastball · 1791147026 · focus · HN ↗

         Is there much impact of a marginal gallon? This is evaporative cooling, no? It's gonna come back down as rain and refill wherever datacenter took it from.

         1. p1necone · 1791152347 · focus · HN ↗

            Depends on where it's coming from and who else needs water. If the water supply being drawn from was collected from rainwater initially and there's still enough for local residents to also have water, then sure, it's probably sustainable. But if the water is coming from an underground aquifer and there's otherwise not enough rain in the region to go around then it's a finite resource.
         2. swiftcoder · 1791190897 · focus · HN ↗

            > It's gonna come back down as rain and refill wherever datacenter took it from

            It's going to come back down as rain, yes, but there is no guarantee it will come down in the place you need it. Fairly minor variations in surface temperatures and evaporation can have a large effect on local rainfall.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.