Cooling vents on data centres in Virginia. Researchers hope that storing data on glass will save energy Copyright AFP/File ANDREW CABALLEROREYNOLDS
The reasons for data centres using lots of power and energy are surprisingly simple and astonishingly primitive. So is the business logic.
Water is required for cooling systems. The data centres use evaporative cooling, which is hardly surprising. It’s just that they use so much water.
Energy is required for high levels of processing power and for cooling systems.
Quaint.
What’s required for all this power and energy is a little harder to pin down. It’s an openended, constantly exponentially expanding demand for money to pay for these things.
If you were trying to find the exact opposite of costeffective planned system construction, this is it. There are a few things missing from this antiquated kitschbased approach to essential services.
Energy efficiency is a 50yearold best practice maxim in any electronic system design.
Water efficiency is a 5000yearold basic best practice for human societies.
Cost efficiency is the basic best business practice.
Then there’s a rustic thing called “market efficiency”. This happens when your market doesn’t want to pay top dollar for “whatever”.
There are a few unexpected problems here. Does the wider market really need AI? Not really. It can do most of what it needs without it. Spending millions or billions and calling it “productivity” doesn’t wash with the hardheads. ROI matters. So does disrupting ongoing business for the sake of tech that will be obsolete in 10 years.
Let’s start with energy efficiency. If you know how a switch works, you probably also know that adding a few digits with dollar signs to turning a switch off and on doesn’t make a lot of sense. Running gigantic amounts of power to supply the answer to “Why am I a chicken?” isn’t necessarily a good use of resources.
If you happen to know that new tech like photonic electronics are already in the pipeline, do you really want to fund a technosandcastle? Sandcastles are traditionally built in the presence of large amounts of liquidity. They fall apart when they can’t handle the effects of liquidity. Poetic, huh?
Let’s not bash AI hype any more than required. It no longer needs mentioning. This tech at the consumer and business level doesn’t really do very much. Making searches a bit more efficient, great. Chatbots, so what? A turgid report nobody reads, who cares? AI screws up and produces a cluster of added costs and likely lawsuits, why do you bother? AI hallucinations, what the hell are you doing?
This is an investment?
Investment in what, may one make so bold to ask?
Let’s get real. AI is far more efficient functionally as a scientific asset. There it pays for itself and has metrics to prove it. The rest is just cosmetic dross. It’s a novelty act until further notice.
Water efficiency could be a real killer. US water shortages alone could reach lethal levels by 2071. The rest of the world also has major water issues, depending on regions.
Global energy costs are also getting worse. The world’s most mismanaged and mythologized sector is making a dog’s breakfast out of cost projections. Grids handle X amount of energy. If you want to expand, the added costs will be astronomical. See any issues?
This is where Australia’s new rules, which equate to “BYO water and power,” come in. Australia is now the secondlargest developer of data centres. Development proposals will need to meet these standards to proceed.
More annoyingly, all of these energy and water problems are fixable with a good initial design. The word is “sustainable”. It’s a business principle, not some recycled hippie buzzword. If you want to be in business next week, you MUST address sustainability.
Why so much current for processing? What’s wrong with microvolts? Nano systems use far less power. Why stick a gigantic, expensive straw in the world’s water supply when you could simply recycle the water to the point of a single metric?
Water and energy are not negotiable. Nor is proper costing. Take the hint.
