I hope to hear words like "bollocks" and "bullshit" dispersed equitably.
That's also (again AFAIK) what causes the most concern among local residents in many locations. Separate from concerns about how a new neighbor might impact their electric bill in the future is the concern that drawing enough for a small city from the water table each day could prove detrimental in the long term.
https://kutv.com/news/utah-water/questions-grow-over-water-u...
Looks like the cedar rapids site is also closed loop, with the full buildout being a hair over 1 gigawatt. Compared to salt lake city, colder in the winter, and a bit cooler in the summer but with very high humidity comparatively.
https://corridorbusiness.com/qts-data-center-project-will-pu...
Plenty of places are using water faster than the aquifers they use regenerate. I hold no issue with banning using that limited freshwater resource for cooling.
Remove all water usage by individuals and DCs and you've barely made a dent in water usage, so why is the solution supposed to be a compromise somewhere between the two?
To pretend that providing an unprompted glass of drinking water (or not) makes any significant difference is reprehensibly inept.
(To be clear, I don't think that your description of the reality you observed is bad in any way. The report is fine; it's a good report. The thing you described in that report is simply very ugly, in and of itself.)
Granted I may not be the local expert on this any more since I have cut way back on restaurant visits over the last 6-8 years.
>Plenty of places are using water faster than the aquifers they use regenerate.
I thought I would split this since it can be a pretty deep subject. When I was in college in the 1980's (geoscience), one of the country's largest aquifers (Ogallala) was in the news all the time. The story was that at the rate they were pumping there would only be 25-30 years of water left in the reservoir. Recharge rates were too slow and the recharge zone was too far west. Late in the 90's T Boone Pickens fired the first real shots in the water wars by negotiating water rights over a large portion of the Ogallala aquifer building a water empire. Part of his plan was to pipeline water to N Texas cities that were running short of water, a consequence of their own failure to look far enough into the future to construct reservoirs and to upgrade systems and to manage supplies so that overuse was disincentivized. The pipelines were never built. Reservoirs are still difficult to construct. N Texas has an even more onerous problem with population growth outstripping supplies. Meanwhile, the Ogallala still has about 25-30 years before it is pumped dry. It isn't that the targets were wrong, it was more that those numbers applied to the areas where pumping was the most aggressive but overall there were areas that still had significant reserves and the programs instituted that encouraged upgrading equipment and more efficient water use were successful in putting the brakes on the decline of the aquifer. I'm probably getting most of this wrong so if you know something different, I'm all ears.
>I hold no issue with banning using that limited freshwater resource for cooling.
In line with the whole water problem here in Texas I agree that there should be statewide bans on using freshwater sources for cooling data centers. I especially would like that ban to be extended to the oil and gas industry so that they are prohibited from using freshwater for frac fluid. Since the shale boom really got rolling here in Texas they have left a trail of dry water wells and surface water pollution from poorly cemented casing or from injection of recovered production and frac fluids into subsurface formations that have created environmental issues when the injected fluids migrate through old joints or along dormant faults, re-energizing those faults and pushing water to the surface, especially through the pincushion of abandoned wells that were never plugged by their operators.
This is Texas so I expect that the industry will continue to get special treatment in Austin and since data centers are the new big thing, they will also take precedence over anything that local residents need in order to live comfortably. As a state, Texas has been rotten from the top down for a long time.
People should have the right to refuse to allow data centers in their areas in the same way that they have refused other things that could be described as a public benefit like landfills, wind and solar farms, new highways or high speed rail service, etc.
They will be the ones affected by their refusal when that industry passes them by and the local economy remains stagnant or in decline. It is ultimately their right to decide their own fates and if they gather opposition to a project and vote it down locally then the state and any industry should have no recourse other than to follow the will of the people on down the highway to some place where the locals are more accepting of the risk/rewards for the new infrastructure.
We don't need shit like this everywhere. There is plenty of room and somewhere, some group of gullibles will jump on the opportunity to be bled for someone else's benefit.
There is zero treason in that. I think you don't understand that word. That is freedom in its most pure form. Local people decide their own fates without lobbyists or other serial prevaricators spinning yarns about how great it will all be if they just accept all the downsides without arguing.