Slashdot Mirror


Using the Sea To Cool Your Data Center

1sockchuck writes "We haven't yet seen signs of the Google Navy of seagoing data centers that use the ocean for power and cooling. But data center developers are planning to use sea water air conditioning in a new project on the island nation of Mauritius in the Indian Ocean. Cold water from deep-sea currents would be piped ashore to be used in a heat exchanger for the data center facility. A similar system has been used to replace the chillers at Cornell University, which draws cold water from Lake Cayuga. The Cornell system cost $50 million, but has slashed cooling-related energy usage by 86 percent."

194 comments

  1. interest prospect by Icegryphon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But what are maintenance costs and lifespan of such a piece of equipment,
    I can't image Saltwater not eating the hell out of all the piping.

    1. Re:interest prospect by sopssa · · Score: 5, Funny

      I can't image Saltwater not eating the hell out of all the piping.

      Yeah, thats the real problem. I hope we discover such metal soon so we can get boats and ships in the oceans too.

    2. Re:interest prospect by FooAtWFU · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You keep the saltwater on one side of a heat exchanger; it minimizes the vulnerable piping, and helps a lot. Heck, you could build the big seawater pipes out of concrete.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    3. Re:interest prospect by Useful+Wheat · · Score: 4, Informative

      A low carbon stainless steel such as the 316 series should be more than sufficient for any piping. Moving parts such as pumps and impellers would be made of titanium for optimum durability and minimum downtime. Lifetime of the pipes is assured by simply adding a small corrosion allowance to the wall thickness (maybe 1/4"), and checking for corrosion once in a while to make sure its not being destroyed faster than you predict. Although that may sound ridiculous, I promise you it is both fairly common and not that hard. Seawater is the lifeblood of many power plants, and it doesn't take a miracle to handle it.

    4. Re:interest prospect by initdeep · · Score: 5, Insightful

      seawater is the lifeblood of every naval nuclear power plant, and as someone who was in the navy and in charge of the heat exchangers attached to a naval nuclear power plant, i can assure you it is a big deal and a LOT of time and maintenance is put into preventing corrosion and the associated leakage in piping that a heat exchanger utilizes.
      In order to have efficient heat exchange between two moving fluids, you need a very thin wall and you need it to be clear of any and all corrosion. This means a lot of time and effort, not too mention chemicals are used.
      For a mobile naval vessel, there is no other option, so the cost isn't an issue.

      For a land based cooling system, it is an issue because there very well may be less expensive alternatives.

      Not too mention the possible ramifications (good and bad) of discharging all of the heated water back into the marine ecology.

    5. Re:interest prospect by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Not to mention mussels and other sea life growing inside the pipe. It would be interesting to see a long-term economic study of this to see if the energy savings more than make up for the increased maintenance costs. Heating seawater has long-term ecological consequences. Also, wouldn't this necessitate locating data centers on prime ocean-front real estate, which is some of the most expensive real estate in the world? (Although it would be great for attracting IT professionals!) From a Thermodynamics standpoint this is a big win; not such a big win from a total cost of ownership standpoint.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    6. Re:interest prospect by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 1

      People and data centers have a different idea of what the ideal coastline is. Most people want it shallow and sandy: all the better to swim and surf in. A data center wants it deep and rocky, so it can access extremely cold water without picking up too much debris. The lack of overlap would contribute to lower prices for real estate.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    7. Re:interest prospect by zach_the_lizard · · Score: 1

      I sure hope they get that fixed quickly, I'm tired of the tubes that connect to my modem rusting out so often. It's very frustrating.

      --
      SSC
    8. Re:interest prospect by digitalunity · · Score: 2, Informative

      Most steel ships are painted to prevent corrosion. Paint is a thermal insulator. Coating the inside of your heat transfer pipes with a thermal insulator is like masturbating with sandpaper - it might work, but it doesn't work well.

      Aluminum is a great thermal conductor and is saltwater resistant with the 6061 and 6063 alloys. Galvanic corrosive action does occur though, but this can be avoided with careful attention to construction methods and avoiding direct metal to aluminum contact.

      --
      You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
    9. Re:interest prospect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      304 or 316 stainless steel is about the worst selection you could make for a seawater environment. Chlorides (stress corrosion cracking) will eat through the 304 or 316 very quickly. You could try using a higher alloy such as 310 or 314, but you're probably better off staying away from austenitic stainless steel.

    10. Re:interest prospect by digitalunity · · Score: 1

      The ecological impact was my first reaction. Rising ocean temperatures has been shown to increase toxic cyanobacterial algae bloom production. Heating water with megawatts of power and pumping it back into the ocean could have negative localized ecological effects.

      As far as stainless steel, sure 316 is resistant, but it's a lot more expensive than 6061 aluminum alloy.

      --
      You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
    11. Re:interest prospect by Gonoff · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They manage well in the Sydey Opera House. They keep the salt water out of their system and heat exchange to fresh water which they circulate.

      To keep the corrosion low, they use sacricicial anodes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacrificial_anode . These are also used on ships, oil rigs and pipelines - probably more things too. This is nothing new. I believe the opera house was finished in 1974 so they are using well tested technology here.

      --
      I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
    12. Re:interest prospect by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      Maybe this is a stupid question, but why can't the surfaces that are exposed to the corrosive fluid (i.e. saltwater) simply be painted with a corrosion resistant paint?

    13. Re:interest prospect by saforrest · · Score: 1

      Most steel ships are painted to prevent corrosion. Paint is a thermal insulator. Coating the inside of your heat transfer pipes with a thermal insulator is like masturbating with sandpaper - it might work, but it doesn't work well.

      My kingdom for mod points...

    14. Re:interest prospect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe this is a stupid question, but why can't the surfaces that are exposed to the corrosive fluid (i.e. saltwater) simply be painted with a corrosion resistant paint?

      Any such paint would interfere with the heat exchange, which is the biggest area of concern.

    15. Re:interest prospect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See the first paragraph of this post for an explanation.

    16. Re:interest prospect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Paint would reduce the effectiveness of the heat transfer. It ends being an extra insulator.

    17. Re:interest prospect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it would reduce efficiency, see above post.

    18. Re:interest prospect by MicktheMech · · Score: 1

      First, the paint will likely reduce the conductivity of the exchanger tubes and reduce the efficiency. Really though, the issue isn't so much finding a corrosion resistant material (there are austenitics or even duplex stainless steels that hold up pretty well), the issue is that these things are running 24/7 for a long time and salt water is going to eventually eat away at whatever you run it through. Normally you can just use pipes thick enough to last a while, but when designing a heat exchanger you want to use tubes as thing as possible to minimize the thermal resistance. I used to work in oil and gas, we were on a lake, so I don't have direct experience with salt water, but with brackish water we were still using tube thicknesses around 1/10th of an inch in our heat exchangers.

    19. Re:interest prospect by pearl298 · · Score: 1

      Obviously this is a problem with cooling the engine of an ocean going vessel too.

      The traditional solution is to use corrosion resistant metals and to add sacrificial anodes of a metal such as zinc which make electrical contact with the metal parts to be protected.

      It is an added expense, but quite manageable.

      For many years I lived on a sailboat with a 30 year old diesel engine which worked just fine, but you had to replace the zinc anodes every couple of months.

      They cost about US$2 and took about 10 minutes to replace.

    20. Re:interest prospect by MicktheMech · · Score: 2, Informative

      Aluminum is a great thermal conductor and is saltwater resistant with the 6061 and 6063 alloys.

      The 6000 series alloys are also extremely expensive compared to steel and more importantly difficult to weld, even compared to stainless.

    21. Re:interest prospect by mano+the+shark · · Score: 1

      Using 316 stainless steel would not be a wise decision in a seawater environment. Chlorides lead to stress corrosion cracking (SCC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress_corrosion_cracking in austenitic stainless steel and types 304 and 316 are especially susceptible to SCC. You could try a higher alloy such as 310 or 314, but are better off staying away from austenitic stainless steel.

    22. Re:interest prospect by fightinfilipino · · Score: 1

      Coating the inside of your heat transfer pipes with a thermal insulator is like masturbating with sandpaper - it might work, but it doesn't work well.

      so that's what i've been doing wrong the entire time!

    23. Re:interest prospect by sexconker · · Score: 1

      Mike Rowe had to replace a bunch of those bad boys in a hurricane barrier.

    24. Re:interest prospect by Furmy · · Score: 1

      Why not move the heat-exchanger (thin walls and all) into the ocean. Have a closed-loop of FRESH water that you pump around. It cools down in the ocean and then is pumped back in, through the data centre, heats up. Now you've got internals (and your pump) free of salt. Yes, you still have to maintain the outside of all the pipes AND the ocean-side of the heat exchanger but that seems easier than moving salt around.

    25. Re:interest prospect by Dayze!Confused · · Score: 1

      Most likely it is a closed circuit circulation of fresh water inside the pipes that works much like a car radiator system, by pumping water through their data center and then into the deep sea radiator that they build. The only part that needs to be monitored and aware of corrosion and such is the outside of these pipes, which someone else mentioned could be dealt with by adding a corrosion layer into the pipes and monitoring every once in a while.

      --
      "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." [Thomas Jefferson]
    26. Re:interest prospect by david.given · · Score: 4, Informative

      A low carbon stainless steel such as the 316 series should be more than sufficient for any piping.

      Stainless steel is prone to pitting corrosion when exposed to water containing chlorides. 316 series stainless steel is significantly corroded by concentrations of chlorides above 1000ppm (ref). Standard sea water at 3.5% salinity has a chloride concentration of about 20000ppm (ref).

      Stainless steel works rather like aluminium when it comes to preventing corrosion; the surface oxidises very rapidly to form a passive coating, protecting the bulk of the metal from oxygen. In water, this only works if (a) the water contains enough oxygen to passivate the metal, and (b) the water won't then dissolve the coating as soon as it forms. In particular, this means that stainless steel is not suitable for things like marine bolts, because under the bolt head the water will quickly lose all its oxygen and you'll get corrosion. It also means you have to be very careful in sea water as the salts can strip off the chromium oxy passive layer.

      316 stainless is considered 'marine grade', but only just. In particular, it's unsuitable for warm sea water, as this makes the water vastly more corrosive. So you probably don't want to use it for coolant pipes.

      And I haven't even mentioned electrolytic corrosion yet. Sea water is one of the most corrosive environments on the planet, and dealing with corrosion is one of the biggest problems when working with it.

    27. Re:interest prospect by Medievalist · · Score: 1

      But what are maintenance costs and lifespan of such a piece of equipment,
      I can't image Saltwater not eating the hell out of all the piping.

      Google "sacrificial anode".

      I'm more worried about heating up the oceans. Heat pollution is already a problem in rivers and streams, and it's not like we aren't already stressing the hell out of the oceans...

    28. Re:interest prospect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      every (sea water) ship, and powerplant near seawater, manages to use seawater for cooling so it is obviously not an unsolvable problem

    29. Re:interest prospect by fireball84513 · · Score: 1

      Paint is a thermal insulator. Coating the inside of your heat transfer pipes with a thermal insulator is like masturbating with sandpaper - it might work, but it doesn't work well.

      i can just imagine some retard reading your comment and then taking a piece of sandpaper to his dick thinking "it might work"

      --
      "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
    30. Re:interest prospect by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily a bad idea. You can even use plastics and concrete instead - sure, they're poor conductors, but water's so good that you just build it bigger.

      I watched a special on the live kelp aquarium, they pump LOTS of seawater and it's very maintenance intensive - they need to run special pigs through the pipes to keep them clean and hire divers to scrub the outsides.

      In something like this cheap construction cost and corrosion resistance is probably a bigger concern than thermal coupling efficiency.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    31. Re:interest prospect by 10Neon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This sounds a lot like the arguments about microwave radiation from radio towers and microwave ovens: it seems to overlook the massive amounts of energy arriving from the sun.

      Every square inch of ocean (minus those under clouds at a given moment) is constantly absorbing radiation. The fact that there are even oceanic currents- huge, fast-moving masses of water, moving for thousands of miles, is a testament to the kind of energy the ocean deals with all the time. If there's ever a problem with humans overheating a patch of water, it's because they're not spreading the heat far enough, or placing it somewhere where currents can move it off. When it comes to energy, "human scale" and "planetary scale" are still quite different from one another.

      Somewhat related: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_thermal_energy_conversion
      If deep, cold water is pumped up, you could actually achieve a local net cooling, if you wanted.

      --
      The Guide is definitive. Reality is frequently inaccurate.
    32. Re:interest prospect by treeves · · Score: 4, Informative

      I hope you intended to mod the comment down. What do you think ship's propulsion plant cooling systems and condensers use for cooling water and what do you suppose they are made of? Yes, seawater flows through metal tubes on every ship on the sea. There are saltwater corrosion-resistant alloys, like some bronzes, Monel, and others. Nobody paints the inside of condenser tubes on a nuclear-powered ship, and the primary reason is NOT because paint is a thermal insulator. It's just not necessary and it would be a PITA to do it.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    33. Re:interest prospect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most steel ships are painted to prevent corrosion. Paint is a thermal insulator. Coating the inside of your heat transfer pipes with a thermal insulator is like masturbating with sandpaper - it might work, but it doesn't work well.

      Aluminum is a great thermal conductor and is saltwater resistant with the 6061 and 6063 alloys. Galvanic corrosive action does occur though, but this can be avoided with careful attention to construction methods and avoiding direct metal to aluminum contact.

      That is a truly unique point of view. I'll never look at sandpaper the same again.http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/09/09/21/1927252/Using-the-Sea-To-Cool-Your-Data-Center?from=rss#

    34. Re:interest prospect by Nein+Volts · · Score: 0

      What ever happened to good old fashioned heat conducting plastic?? OOps! I forgot.. We have to find a way to jack up the price to 50 million. (Profit ya know..)

    35. Re:interest prospect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All of this, plus 316 stainless is a lousy heat conductor. In seawater, you need to use a duplex stainless steel like 4087(?) for bolts and piping to prevent corrosion - very expensive stuff. Not sure if that helps with conducting heat though.

      The other possible option is sacrificial anodes. My father had these for the engine block (cast iron) in his boat to protect the cooling system.

    36. Re:interest prospect by Sebilrazen · · Score: 1

      Coating the inside of your heat transfer pipes with a thermal insulator is like masturbating with sandpaper - it might work, but it doesn't work well.

      Tell that to Pinocchio.

      --
      "There are no facts, only interpretations." --Friedrich Nietzsche.
    37. Re:interest prospect by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Hmmm. My understanding is that they are going to pull up the water and pump it back, not just a simple heat exchange. If so, then insulation may be useful.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    38. Re:interest prospect by ruewan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The electricity company in Barbados has been doing this for as long as I can remember. They use sea water to cool their equipment. There equipment seems to last. Most of their intake pipes are fiberglass. The place where they pump the water back out to see is a favourite bathing spot for locals. I wonder about the long-term environmental impact of this. The water there smells funny but it feels really good.

    39. Re:interest prospect by treeves · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not to worry. Aluminum isn't used in ship seawater piping - try Ni-Al bronzes, Ni-Cu alloys, like Monel. There are probably some stainless steels in use and titanium alloys but those are more expensive too. One thing the GP got right is that galvanic corrosion is a big concern in seawater piping systems and heat exchangers. Sacrificial zinc anodes are used frequently to prevent it.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    40. Re:interest prospect by digitalunity · · Score: 1

      I didn't indicate painting the inside of a nuclear powered ship's cooling system was a good idea. I was merely pointing out that paint has been used for years to resist corrosion on marine vessels.

      Bronzes and monels are unnecessarily expensive in applications such as this. Stainless steel, as another person pointed out would also work.

      --
      You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
    41. Re:interest prospect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, masturbating with sandpaper would not work . . . at all.

    42. Re:interest prospect by daybot · · Score: 1

      The Sydney Opera House has closed loop saltwater cooling for their A/C - they feed the saltwater pipes a plate of zinc every year, which is used as a sacrificial metal to avoid corrosion. Pretty clever :)

    43. Re:interest prospect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously you don't work with sea water.

    44. Re:interest prospect by bronney · · Score: 2, Funny

      Anything over 1200 grit should work pretty well. You end up with a shiny rod too!

    45. Re:interest prospect by beckett · · Score: 1

      On a ship they'd probably use a passive system, like a sacrificial anode which needs replacing periodically. if you can plug it in, then cathodic protection would be just as good.

    46. Re:interest prospect by itwerx · · Score: 1

      It's also not that complicated, just submerge a big old titanium heat exchanger out in the water and let convection do its thing. On the hot side you run distilled water, glycol, or whatever's the latest "green" fluid.

    47. Re:interest prospect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Sacrificial anode." Google it yourself.

    48. Re:interest prospect by fractoid · · Score: 1

      Tubes are corroding? Stop downloading Julian Lennon songs or use a sacrificial anode.

      That aside, did anyone else have an immediate temptation to tag this story 'coolstorybro'? :P

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    49. Re:interest prospect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Plastic tubes?

    50. Re:interest prospect by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      i can just imagine some retard reading your comment and then taking a piece of sandpaper to his dick thinking "it might work"

      I just did, you insensitive clod. Now where's the antiseptic cream...

    51. Re:interest prospect by XCondE · · Score: 1

      Coating the inside of your heat transfer pipes with a thermal insulator is like masturbating with sandpaper - it might work, but it doesn't work well.

      Come again?

    52. Re:interest prospect by pbhj · · Score: 1

      Couldn't they sink and anchor a very large container (like a semi-rigid plastic water carrier perhaps), pump out the saltwater (where necessary) and fill with freshwater and cycle it? Sure the heat loss is going to be slow, but with a large enough reservoir or with on/off cycles this seems possible.

      Also, according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halocline, surface temperatures are lower than depth temperatures in polar regions; as salinity is lower at the surface too then moving cooling requirements North seems wise.

    53. Re:interest prospect by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      You remind me of one of my second-year engineering texts. It had a list of common 'definitions' that people think, but are really false. One of them was

      Stainless Steel 316: Universal panacea for corrosion problems.

      Seawater is used for cooling all over the place, and the fact that no-one has a good solution to the corrosion problem speaaks volumes about the magnitude of the problem.

    54. Re:interest prospect by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      It's a bad analogy anyways. Jacking off with sandpaper is obviously idiotic, self-destructive and/or masochistic. Not something that sort-of works.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    55. Re:interest prospect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But what are maintenance costs and lifespan of such a piece of equipment,

      I can't image Saltwater not eating the hell out of all the piping.

      For the seawater side, the intake pipes are HDPE and the heat exchangers are titanium. On the user side they use fresh water with anti corrosion additives.

    56. Re:interest prospect by default+luser · · Score: 1

      Not "clever." This is standard practice in the shipping industry.

      And outside the shipping industry, it's quite common: any galvanized steel you're using is covered in a sacrificial anode, and that includes thousands of miles of long-haul steel electrical poles.

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

    57. Re:interest prospect by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Good idea. The only issue is maintenance, but if they use strong pipes they could use a hinged rig with the heat exchanger on the end, so that it could be sunk deep into the water when in use and floated or lifted to the surface for maintenance. As for thin walls, there could be pressure issues, they could use an overflow tank on the surface to allow for compression of the heat exchanger but it would still have to be strong enough to stand up to the pressure at depth...or they could pressurize the "outdoor" system and use another heat exchanger to interface with a low-pressure system on land - which would be safer for the servers' cooling systems in case sea water leaks in or the "outdoor" system pump fails.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    58. Re:interest prospect by default+luser · · Score: 1

      Stainless steel, as another person pointed out would also work.

      No it wouldn't, not with all alloys.

      Any anything with welds (think any large-bore steel pipe system) is automatically going to be a corrosion target, because the welding process can evaporate key corrosion-resistant elements from the alloy.

      About the only easy solution to salt water is PVC, but that has crap thermal characteristics.

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

    59. Re:interest prospect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... is like masturbating with sandpaper - it might work, but it doesn't work well.

      So tell me again how would it "work"?

    60. Re:interest prospect by BosstonesOwn · · Score: 1

      No thanks , I am still extremely raw..

      --
      This package Does Not Contain a Winner
    61. Re:interest prospect by Medievalist · · Score: 1

      Less than a hundred years ago, everyone believed that the oceans could not possibly be harmed by human sewage, because they were simply too big to pollute. Today, this has been proved both qualitatively and quantitatively wrong.

      Perhaps I'm misinterpreting what you meant, but it sounds to me like you are using essentially the same discredited argument - that humans are tiny and meaningless on a geologic scale. We're not; we do matter; we don't control our world (yet) but our influence on it is vast and profound.

      At the moment "human scale" is significantly larger than "planetary scale". Humans have been sending stuff to other planets for quite some time.

    62. Re:interest prospect by 10Neon · · Score: 1

      The argument was never discredited, only the application of the argument. We could fire all of our nukes into the sun, with no noticeable, not to mention ill, effects. It's the same argument, still being applied correctly.
      Heavy or organic pollutants which radically alter metabolism, and heat, are two completely different things. One can kill a lot of stuff in small quantities, the other is pumped in by the sun, all the time, and is considered part of the status quo.
      You can kill all of the bacteria in a pot of water by adding a couple drops of bleach, but you have to add a huge amount of energy to achieve the same effect.

      (I worry that you barely read my post, because I did prefix that statement with "when it comes to energy" specifically to keep you from wasting a line on mentioning something like interplanetary travel =/ )

      When I said "human scale" I meant, "within human capacity to change." Right now, we could (and have) overheat medium-sized lakes with our coal, nuclear, "hot" power plants. We overcool other bodies of water with the reservoirs of hydroelectric power plants. Chemically, we can take out small to medium-sized ecosystems, physically, we can chop down, drain, or otherwise displace bigger ones. But heat? Even if we dedicated the whole of human activity to (directly*) heating the oceans, we'd be completely incapable of making a dent.

      This post makes the basic point rather vividly: http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1376893&cid=29497453
      5.6*10^24J is not the kind of energy humans, as a species, can hope to move from the land to the sea. And that's for 1 degree.
      As it stands, our current means of cooling uses the atmosphere, in a less-efficient process. As the same post mentions, the atmosphere is less massive and has a much lower specific heat. If you're worried about screwing up the environment, using ocean-based cooling is exactly the kind of thing you'd be into, as it is more efficient, and is placed into a system that is very capable of dealing with it.

      *Directly, as in the thermal result of combustion or electrical resistance (or giant orbital doom-mirrors), as, indirectly, chemically, it appears to be very much within our capacity (read: atmospheric hydrocarbons.)

      --
      The Guide is definitive. Reality is frequently inaccurate.
    63. Re:interest prospect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Paint does very little to prevent corrosion on salt water environments. Galvanic corrosion is the real headache with or without aluminum in the mix, that's why you spend so much money on sacrificial anodes. The zinc anode is a better conductor, so the current exits (or enters) the body through it and therefore the zinc corrodes rather than the (hull) body. Aluminum, even 6061 suffers heavily in sea water even without any ferrous metal attached to it.

  2. So could... by Darkness404 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    All the talk about using the ocean makes one wonder if Google or another company could build a data center that was self-sufficient in the middle of the ocean, would it be under any jurisdiction when it came to copyright?

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    1. Re:So could... by aicrules · · Score: 2, Funny

      It would then be under the jurisdiction of pirates of the real kind.

    2. Re:So could... by sopssa · · Score: 1

      That is what the Google talk in the summary was about, they we're going to use ships as datacenters that float in the ocean.

    3. Re:So could... by maharb · · Score: 1

      If the company has legal entities in a country I am sure they will be subject to those laws.

    4. Re:So could... by aicrules · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That really depends on what treaties the ....zzzz put myself to sleep even trying to explain it.sorry

    5. Re:So could... by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Then the RIAA would pay the U.S. Navy to "accidentally" drop anchor on the pipe before sniping the datacenter's operators.

      Then the American public would be told some daring tale about how the heroic navy again thwarted those evil "pirates" and they wouldn't know the difference!

    6. Re:So could... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      It would then be under the jurisdiction of pirates of the real kind.

      Sounds like it's time for google to go all Ng on their ass. I knew they'd listen to Google Reason 2.0b!

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:So could... by digitalunity · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not really. There is no real escape from national laws with respect to the internet. The reason is simple - everyone is connected! Google has a physical presence in the US, so the company can be penalized in the US for actions of the company abroad.

      Hypothetically, say you have a ship in the middle of the ocean. You, nor your company have no physical presence anywhere other than the ship. You still need peering from someone on the internet. Whether that be joe blow or AT&T, you need peering. So you decide to host the pirate bay on your ship. RIAA sues your peering provider to terminate your internet access. Your peering provider is in the US. Your peering provider loses the copyright battle(assuming, in this fairy tale land they actually fought it) and shuts off your internet access. Ok, that's fine and good, you can just move the ship and find another peering provider. Repeat ad nauseum. Eventaully, you run out of people willing to peer with you.

      You need to get peering from someone with sufficient political clout that THEIR peering provider isn't willing to cut them off, AND is willing to stand up to international pressure to terminate your access. I think there's a reason a lot of nefarious activity on the internet comes from Russia. Nobody has the clout to take russia offline and russia doesn't mind having all the crooks using their tubes.

      --
      You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
  3. Although it uses less electricity, not "green" by Useful+Wheat · · Score: 5, Informative

    Although this solution is certainly "low power" by no means should it be considered to be entirely green. I work as an engineer on many projects that involve sea water, and when you're using it for a cooling source you typically need to inject some sort of chemical to sterilize the water to keep growths off your heat exchangers (barnacles are sort of a pain in the ass in your exchangers). As a result, using sea water for large scale cooling operations is prohibited in large regions of the United States (specifically the gulf coast) mostly over concerns that the large amounts of warm bleached water will damage the ecosystem. Although, that issue aside, using the ocean as a cooling medium is a great idea, and has been used reliably by power plants for many years.

    1. Re:Although it uses less electricity, not "green" by RingDev · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised that a mechanical sleeve would not suffice. A cheap easily replaceable heat conductive barrier between the internal system coolant and the salt water. Sure, it would raise the design and operational costs slightly, but if it allows for a more ecological solution in areas that currently forbid such activity, it might still be well worth it.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    2. Re:Although it uses less electricity, not "green" by Nethead · · Score: 1

      I was wondering about that when I didn't RTFA. I live about 100-500 yards from salt water (depending on the tide) and it's a nasty liquid. I've seen the bilge pumps on some of the local fishing boats.. e-gads! Salt water is always a fight that you can never win, just hold off for a while.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    3. Re:Although it uses less electricity, not "green" by jollyreaper · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Although this solution is certainly "low power" by no means should it be considered to be entirely green. I work as an engineer on many projects that involve sea water, and when you're using it for a cooling source you typically need to inject some sort of chemical to sterilize the water to keep growths off your heat exchangers (barnacles are sort of a pain in the ass in your exchangers). As a result, using sea water for large scale cooling operations is prohibited in large regions of the United States (specifically the gulf coast) mostly over concerns that the large amounts of warm bleached water will damage the ecosystem. Although, that issue aside, using the ocean as a cooling medium is a great idea, and has been used reliably by power plants for many years.

      So maybe it would be more environmentally sound to run a closed loop out to the current to cool the water and bring it back? Salt water is nasty, evil shit.

      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    4. Re:Although it uses less electricity, not "green" by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 3, Funny

      Salt water is nasty, evil shit.

      You should've seen it when it was filled with primordial soup a thousand million years ago, and then came the primitive lifeforms, eeew!

    5. Re:Although it uses less electricity, not "green" by skine · · Score: 1

      "Green" does not mean perfect, good, or even revolutionary. It means better; even if the improvement is only slight.

      Cars that burn gasoline are being called "green." Coal power plants are talking about being/going "green." etc.

    6. Re:Although it uses less electricity, not "green" by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      So maybe it would be more environmentally sound to run a closed loop out to the current to cool the water and bring it back?

      Not really, because then you need some nasty chemicals painted onto your heat exchanger to keep sea weed and barnacles from growing on it.
       
      Paint the heat exchanger with poison, poison the water coming into the heat exchanger, it's the same either way - because if you don't, and it's in contact with seawater, something is going to try to attach itself to it and grow.
       
      Not to mention pumping low pressure water down into the ocean depths is going to require considerable wall thickness to prevent the pipe from being crushed. Or you can use a high pressure system, with fairly thick walls to prevent the shallow and above the water portions from exploding.

    7. Re:Although it uses less electricity, not "green" by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      Cars that burn gasoline are being called "green." Coal power plants are talking about being/going "green." etc.

      Ahhh, the power of marketing.

    8. Re:Although it uses less electricity, not "green" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

        Not sure if anyone actually looked at the proposed plan because it calls for a dual loop system that would not require heat exchangers in the sea.

    9. Re:Although it uses less electricity, not "green" by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      There's new work being done on nanostructured finishes that prevent marine critters from gaining a proper purchase on it. All part of the biomimicry school of design. My dad always said the man who could invent a dependable anti-fouling compound for boat hulls would become richer than Croesus. Looks like we'll get to see if he's right.

      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    10. Re:Although it uses less electricity, not "green" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't have to read the proposal to know that cooling something normally involves small pipes. If you exchange the heat at the data center racks, great, corrode the pipes at important part have possible leaks on your electronics. Or have two, loops, and when you do that you have... wait for it.... a heat exchanger! Doesn't matter if its in the sea, the pipes are full of sea water, and thats the issue.

    11. Re:Although it uses less electricity, not "green" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too bad we can't do something similar to: http://www.aloha.com/~craven/hcane.html

    12. Re:Although it uses less electricity, not "green" by mcsporran · · Score: 1

      Salt water is nasty, evil shit.

      It's still pretty much the base solution for your bloodstream, so it can't be that nasty.
      Nasty to our electro/mechanical inventions, but not evil.

      --
      This is NOT a signature.
    13. Re:Although it uses less electricity, not "green" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the cornell pages describing the environmental impact (they have the whole statement online) they specifically state they avoided using chemicals. They oversized the pipes, did not install mesh, and plan to remove mussels by pigging annually. Without the mesh, they still need to keep fish & shimp out, which they're doing with ultrasound and low-power light.

      http://www.utilities.cornell.edu/utl_lsceis_execsummary.html

  4. Great Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This would be a good idea for the Great lakes, where the water stays very cold all year 'round.

    It could be a good way to attract business to the Midwest.

  5. Cold water cooling by diodeus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Toronto already uses cold water cooling for air-conditioning many of its office towers in the downtown core and has for many years. (see: http://www.enwave.com/dlwc.php). Unless winter never visits Canada again, this is cold body is self-replenishing.

    1. Re:Cold water cooling by pearl298 · · Score: 1

      Of course Lake Ontario is one of the largest FRESH WATER lakes in the world ...

      The only real problem there is zebra mussels which clog pipes and eat many organic pollutants (you can't win them all!)

    2. Re:Cold water cooling by icegreentea · · Score: 1

      Zebra mussels are the reason why Lake Ontario is even close to being clean. They sucked up most of our shit. There's even 'fish' in the lake now because of those suckers.

    3. Re:Cold water cooling by pearl298 · · Score: 1

      I was trying to be polite with the term "organic pollutants" :-)

  6. Otec. by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

    If you could set up an OTEC system as well you could also power the data center as well as cool it.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    1. Re:Otec. by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1

      Yes - check out Whispergen (jfgi) in New Zealand. They make a nice quiet home sized cogenerator based on a Stirling engine. Any decent temperature differential will do.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
  7. Environmental impact, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So Cornell transfers heat from its datacenters into Lake Cayuga. This is understandably good for the datacenters, but what's the impact on Lake Cayuga?

    The Mauritius system sounds interesting, though, because the heat gain in the water seems less likely to have an impact on ocean temperatures, even on a very localized scale. For minimal environmental impact, use large, deep bodies of water with good currents. Take note, Cornell!

    1. Re:Environmental impact, anyone? by caerwyn · · Score: 4, Informative

      The Cornell project was actually incredibly controversial prior to beginning operation for exactly that reason. Studies since have shown that any detrimental effects are negligible, though, so the controversy has died down in recent years. (I was at Cornell when the system went into operation and for a few years afterward)

      --
      The ringing of the division bell has begun... -PF
    2. Re:Environmental impact, anyone? by Trepidity · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not a subjective judgment in either direction, but for what it's worth, this paper abstract quantifies the heat imparted to Lake Cayuga as "equivalent to an additional two hours of sunlight each year".

    3. Re:Environmental impact, anyone? by KMnO4 · · Score: 1

      I think it should be controversial for its price...50 million to pump water deep from a lake and return it? Where can I sign up to be the prime contractor on such a system? Can we say graft?

    4. Re:Environmental impact, anyone? by caerwyn · · Score: 1

      Actually, the price tag isn't entirely unreasonable. Consider the amount of piping that needs to be laid- the Cornell campus is quite large- and the complexity of the hydrodynamics of such a system. That's before you even get to doing the building conversions to ready them for the new cooling system- at the very least, it's like replacing the primary coolers for all of the major buildings that were impacted. That's a lot of hardware. Also, Cornell doesn't really touch Lake Cayuga- so there's a fair amount of work to get the water up the significant hill to the campus.

      Whether or not it's worthwhile is perhaps up for debate (though at 86% saved energy, probably not very *vigorous* debate unless the lifetime of the system is quite short), but I doubt there's a whole lot of graft or waste in that price.

      --
      The ringing of the division bell has begun... -PF
  8. Warm Water Discharge by guyfawkes-11-5 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Powerplants use this frequently, it's a great idea until the amount of warm water discharged begins affecting the discharge site. I can't imagine a data center requiring the amount of cooling that a powerplant would need.
    The EPA required some modifications to a similar system for a powerplant in PR a few weeks ago.
    http://www.waterworld.com/index/display/article-display/1830526029/s-articles/s-waterworld/s-industrial-water/s-wastewater/s-2009/s-08/s-epa-requires_new_pipe.html

    1. Re:Warm Water Discharge by vlm · · Score: 1

      Powerplants use this frequently, it's a great idea until the amount of warm water discharged begins affecting the discharge site. I can't imagine a data center requiring the amount of cooling that a powerplant would need.

      Typical coal plants run around 40% efficient, top of the line natural gas plants run around 60% efficient. Within some rounding errors, the data center will dump about as much heat as its fractional share of the power plant that feeds it.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuel_power_plant

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    2. Re:Warm Water Discharge by gnieboer · · Score: 1

      Yep, nuclear reactors in particular have been noted for this problem, especially a couple in the Great Lakes area. Can't seem to find a decent-quality link though.

      And at the other end of the spectrum, using ground-water for cooling is not a radical idea for housing, that technology is available at most local contractors, is widely used in Florida for cooling, and is spreading across the country. Higher upfront costs, though, than a freon-based system.

      So assume your data center is a) bigger than a single family home, and b) smaller than a nuclear reactor, there is probably a solution out there.

      But the water quality police will have to argue with the air quality police about which is better for the planet.

    3. Re:Warm Water Discharge by maxume · · Score: 1

      As far as I know, most residential heat pumps insert a closed loop into whatever heat sink they are using.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    4. Re:Warm Water Discharge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, but the heat is still transferred nonetheless. 'Closed Loop' is somewhat of an irrelevant term if we are just talking about the heat energy.
      Of course, if we are talking about silt coming in, and radiation going on, then it's somewhat more important...

    5. Re:Warm Water Discharge by maxume · · Score: 1

      I guess my thinking was that they don't really 'use' ground water (at least not in the same way that something like irrigation does).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  9. Refrigerating web servers by gmuslera · · Score: 1

    With a bit of luck, slashdotting them could get Global Warming as side effect. Looks like a good terrorist/supervillain/evil scientist plot.

    1. Re:Refrigerating web servers by irondonkey · · Score: 1

      I thought about this too, and I am definitely not an expert, but the datacenter is probably going to be generating the same amount of waste heat. Isn't it six of one, half-dozen of another whether that waste heat goes into the air or the water?

    2. Re:Refrigerating web servers by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

      It's going to generate waste heat, anyway. The key is that it's not producing CO2, which adds greenhouse effect to the heat produced.

    3. Re:Refrigerating web servers by stevelinton · · Score: 1

      Air is poor at both carrying and conducting heat, compared to water. Losing that much heat to the air would involve blowing a vast amount of air through the building, especially in warmer climates where the ambient air might be at 40C to start with. Water is much more compact and it costs less to pump enough water past the computers to carry the heat. Especially if you have a source of free chilled water.

  10. Old sawmill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Think they are already doing the sea water cooling thing at the old sawmill in Hamina that Google bought.
    http://www.google.com/intl/en/datacenter/hamina/index.html

  11. global warming anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    seriously this is pretty direct

    1. Re:global warming anyone? by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Generally speaking, humans are not believed to have the capacity to directly affect the global climate on any significant scale. We can only affect it indirectly by altering the amount of heat received from the Sun and the amount emitted back into space. While the heat emitted by these projects may have localized effects, it's highly unlikely to produce any global climate effects. I suppose there is a tiny chance of disrupting ocean currents, but that's indirect, and only redistributes heat, it doesn't affect the global average. Global warming also redistributes heat, but the global average also climbs, it's not zero sum (within the Earth's atmosphere; everything is zero sum eventually).

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    2. Re:global warming anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if you're taking anti-matter into account even god can be zero-summed. wow, divine kryptonite :O

  12. Computer cause global warming! by ipoverscsi · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm not too sure about the anthropogenic global warming, but I'm starting to come around to it. Earlier my contention was that global warming scientists are causing global warming, but I'm beginning to think that maybe -- just maybe -- computers in general might be the cause. I mean, if computers are having to pump cold water from the ocean depths to cool computers, that's gotta be dumping a lot of heat back into the ocean, right? Right...?

    1. Re:Computer cause global warming! by lenehey · · Score: 1

      How is it the parent is modded insightful? Funny, maybe. Your finger slip?

    2. Re:Computer cause global warming! by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      that's gotta be dumping a lot of heat back into the ocean, right

      yeah, but since nobody drives to a library anymore, it's a wash.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  13. Most of downtown Toronto is cooled by lakewater by insanewombat · · Score: 3, Informative

    Most of downtown Toronto is cooled by lakewater - enwave energy provides district cooling for most of the major buildings in the downtown core. This includes 151 Front St., one of the major datacentres in the area. See here

    1. Re:Most of downtown Toronto is cooled by lakewater by Archon-X · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Slightly offtopic, but still geeky.

      The enwave tunnels were being extended even as late as mid last year (I'm assuming it's either finished, or close to it).

      I managed to get in and pay them a visit while construction was stopped for the winter. It was a fascinating peek into their system - the tunnels are placed in overlapping crosses from as far North as Bay and Elizabeth, as far south as Lakeside. I assume the cross pattern is to give as much coverage as possible.

      For the intruiged, here are a few snaps.

      http://www.ninjito.com/2008-02-29a/qx-to-2.jpg [bottom of entry shaft, entry point for TBM]
      http://www.ninjito.com/2008-02-29a/qx-to-3.jpg [Inside an unformed tunnel - the cooling pipes are laid in the bottom, then covered with concrete, leaving the top semicircle as walk access]
      http://www.ninjito.com/2008-02-29a/qx-to-1.jpg
      http://www.ninjito.com/2008-02-18/qx-to-3.jpg [close up of the trains they used for construction]

    2. Re:Most of downtown Toronto is cooled by lakewater by inhuman_4 · · Score: 1

      Did you use HDR on those images? They look kinda surreal.

    3. Re:Most of downtown Toronto is cooled by lakewater by Archon-X · · Score: 1

      Nah, the panoramics were all shot on film. Just careful selection of position + composure.

  14. Other cooling techniques by Wowsers · · Score: 0

    I might just be a bit far out with this (non sea water) solution, but why don't they just install a heat exchanger to generate their own electricity? It generates electricity whilst not costing the earth in installation / cooling costs.

    --
    Take Nobody's Word For It.
    1. Re:Other cooling techniques by jabithew · · Score: 1

      Second Law of Thermodynamics; the heat is probably of too low-grade to be used to generate useful electricity. The temperature gradient between ambient and the temperature the heat is being released at likely isn't big enough either. The ratio between Thot and Tcold limits the efficiency; the higher the ratio, the higher the efficiency.

      See this Wikipedia for a reasonable discussion of this concept.

      --
      All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
  15. Already old news by thewils · · Score: 1

    Didn't they try this in New Orleans a couple of years back?

    --
    Once I was a four stone apology. Now I am two separate gorillas.
  16. Wait, back that up, reverse it. by blhack · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one that reads things like this as:

    "Check out this great new way to heat our oceans using our datacenters!".

    You guys realize that the energy doesn't just disappear, right?

    --
    NewslilySocial News. No lolcats allowed.
    1. Re:Wait, back that up, reverse it. by RobVB · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The heat certainly doesn't disappear, but you're just pumping heat into cold water with this system. The transfer of heat from a warm to a cold substance is a process which increases entropy, which means it's a spontaneous process (it doesn't take any energy to do it).

      Air-conditioning, on the other hand, transfers heat from a cold to a warm substance (the cooled air inside becomes cooler, the warm air outside becomes warmer), which is not a spontaneous process, meaning you're using extra energy. This extra energy is ultimately wasted as extra heat in the warm substance.

      Also, the extra energy which A/C uses generally comes from burning fossil fuels at relatively low efficiencies, emitting even more heat into the atmosphere.

      All in all, you're putting a LOT less energy (heat) into the earth if you're using a spontaneous process to cool your stuff.

      --
      I'd rather you rationally disagree than irrationally agree.
    2. Re:Wait, back that up, reverse it. by nsayer · · Score: 1

      "Check out this great new way to heat our oceans using our datacenters!"

      You say that like it's a bad thing.

      We're going to have datacenters (the fact that you're posting to /. makes you a hypocrite otherwise). So which is worse? Cooling them with electrically powered air-conditioning? Or using something else as a heat sink?

    3. Re:Wait, back that up, reverse it. by glitch23 · · Score: 1

      The heat goes into the ocean, which is already cool or cold depending on depth. The warmer water will warm up the cooler water so the temperature distribution averages out. The heat will dissipate from the water eventually from the surface of the body of water and enter the atmosphere just as if it was placed there originally by using A/C. At least, that's what my brain tells me but I've never had a class in fluid dynamics or thermodynamics.

      --
      this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
    4. Re:Wait, back that up, reverse it. by russotto · · Score: 1

      We're going to have datacenters (the fact that you're posting to /. makes you a hypocrite otherwise). So which is worse? Cooling them with electrically powered air-conditioning? Or using something else as a heat sink?

      Radiate the excess heat into space. But not in any direction where any hypothetical aliens might live.

    5. Re:Wait, back that up, reverse it. by CFD339 · · Score: 1

      We are already using the oceans to cool pretty much everything. We use the oceans and/or the atmosphere to absorb all the btu's we generate -- we just do it indirectly. If you use a heat sink with a fan on it, then you're heating the air around it. If you use an air conditioning unit in a data center, you're heating their outside the data center (in fact, causing a good deal more heat than you're removing from the room).

      In terms of taking less energy to perform the cooling, this may prove to have much less impact on the environment than using something dreadfully inefficient like compressed coolant air conditioning.

      In fact, if you were to take in seawater, use it to cool a radiator (in the nature of a heat exchange system) then spray it back to the ocean by misting it or using it in a fountain out from of the place, you could potentially transfer those btu's back to mechanical energy through the process of evaporation and at the same time add clean water as humidity to the air --

      --
      The problem with quotes on the internet, is that nobody bothers to check their veracity. -- Abraham Lincoln
  17. Cooling from the sea! by spun · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Welcome, humans! I am ready for you! Fish, plankton, sea greens and cooling from the sea. Fresh as harvest day. Overwhelming, am I not? Are you, too, startled? Am I too removed from your kin?"

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    1. Re:Cooling from the sea! by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Ah! Someone besides me watched Logan's Run last weekend.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    2. Re:Cooling from the sea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where is Sanctuary?

  18. Environmental Concerns by Laptopdude · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Raising the temperature of a body of water by even a few degrees can have disastrous consequences; from outright killing species, to producing algal blooms that deplete oxygen levels (and then kill species). I mean, think about it. Water resists temperature change much more than air, so a sudden increase is bad news to creatures that just aren't made to deal with it. Also, a recent study has found that increased carbon dioxide levels are making marine life more susceptible to fluctuating temperature and oxygen levels.

    But, of course, just one place in the ocean using this method isn't going to have that much effect. It's if and when this cooling strategy starts to catch on that we have to worry about affecting our environment, and weigh the consequences of air conditioning (fossil fuel emissions) versus heat pollution.

    1. Re:Environmental Concerns by RobVB · · Score: 5, Informative

      The total mass of the oceans is about 1.4*10^21 kg. The total mass of the atmosphere is about 5*10^18 kg. That means the oceans weigh about 300 times as much as the atmosphere.

      The heat capacity of water is about 4000 J * kg ^ -1 * K ^ -1. The heat capacity of air is about 1 kJ * kg ^ -1 * K ^ -1, or about 1000 J * kg ^ -1 * K ^ -1.

      So since there's 300 times as much water as there is air, and the heat capacity of water is 4 times larger, heating up the atmosphere by 1200 degree Celsius would take the same amount of energy as heating up the oceans by 1 degree Celsius. This may not prove or disprove your point, I just started thinking about numbers when you said "raising the temperature of a body of water by a few degrees".

      --
      I'd rather you rationally disagree than irrationally agree.
    2. Re:Environmental Concerns by Khashishi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I knew the environment would come up. Of course, pretty much anything humans do is going to be deleterious to the environment. But put things in perspective. It's more thermodynamically efficient to transfer heat to the ocean directly, rather than burn fuel to create electricity to power a heat pump which is used to transfer heat into the air. The power plant also needs to be cooled, either by evaporating large amounts of water in cooling towers, or by transferring heat to an ocean or lake. Which do you think is better for the environment?

    3. Re:Environmental Concerns by mujadaddy · · Score: 2, Funny

      heating up the atmosphere by 1200 degree Celsius would take the same amount of energy as heating up the oceans by 1 degree Celsius.

      Wow. Let's do that!

      --
      Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur...
      "Force shits upon Reason's back." - Poor Richard's Almanac
    4. Re:Environmental Concerns by RobVB · · Score: 1

      Which do you think is better for the environment?

      Secret option number three: join the Amish.

      --
      I'd rather you rationally disagree than irrationally agree.
    5. Re:Environmental Concerns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The total mass of the oceans is about 1.4*10^21 kg. The total mass of the atmosphere is about 5*10^18 kg. That means the oceans weigh about 300 times as much as the atmosphere.

      The heat capacity of water is about 4000 J * kg ^ -1 * K ^ -1. The heat capacity of air is about 1 kJ * kg ^ -1 * K ^ -1, or about 1000 J * kg ^ -1 * K ^ -1.

      So since there's 300 times as much water as there is air, and the heat capacity of water is 4 times larger, heating up the atmosphere by 1200 degree Celsius would take the same amount of energy as heating up the oceans by 1 degree Celsius. This may not prove or disprove your point, I just started thinking about numbers when you said "raising the temperature of a body of water by a few degrees".

      Except we don't know exactly what raising the temperature of the oceans by one degree will do.

    6. Re:Environmental Concerns by Spit · · Score: 1

      There are local concerns as ocean temperature is not uniform. On a small scale such as this cooling scenario, local heating may promote algae or bacteria, but the reality is it would be as insignificant as cooling blocks on the roof of your building.

      --
      POKE 36879,8
    7. Re:Environmental Concerns by Obfuscant · · Score: 1
      Secret option number three: join the Amish.

      Sounds good, I'm turning my computer off right NO CARRIER

    8. Re:Environmental Concerns by asicsolutions · · Score: 1

      Yeah... You never hear about the Amish having problems cooling their data centers!

    9. Re:Environmental Concerns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We will raise your planet's temperature by one million degrees a day. For five days..."

    10. Re:Environmental Concerns by izomiac · · Score: 1

      Exactly the reason I'm cautious despite overall optimism about this idea. Although it's not quite true that nothing is known. I personally don't know much, but two things come to mind.

      First, in the human body (IIRC) 1.6 degrees Celsius is the difference between normal, a fever or hypothermia. Fortunately, we're adapted to external temperature changes, so we can tolerate something like twenty degree changes in the environment fairly easily. Marine creatures have no reason to have developed this adaptation. Combine temperature sensitivity with looking for a variety of other factors (salinity, light, current, prey/predators, etc.) and I'd imagine small changes to the ocean temperature would kill a lot of sea life in an area.

      The second thing is that ocean currents move based on temperature and salinity (related to temperature) differences. A staggeringly huge amount of water moves this way, and I'm not sure I'd want countless tons of slightly warm water to flood toward a coastline because the temperature switched from being slightly cooler to slightly warmer. Not to mention the effect on weather stuff like this has (e.g. why the UK is relatively warm).

      Realistically though, changing the ocean's temperature by a single degree would take a very long time and involve a tremendous amount of energy. IMHO something like that would be a few orders of magnitude worse than global warming. Local changes of that magnitude are possible though.

    11. Re:Environmental Concerns by proton · · Score: 1

      Maybe thats what happened to Venus; no oceans, meaning the energy went straight into the atmosphere making it 600 degrees. All those poor venutians and their computers...

  19. Gulf Coast rejected something like this by madcat2c · · Score: 1

    There was a story of a LNG (Liquid Natural Gas)facility that lost approval for using this method to do cooling for a facility (or something in the LNG process) with Gulf coast seawater. The problem is that all the baby fish and other sea life die in the system. They were worried about the local shrimp and fishing industry getting wiped out. They made them use a closed loop system to solve this problem.

    1. Re:Gulf Coast rejected something like this by aXis100 · · Score: 1

      Umm..... I get your point, but the refrigeration on LNG plant would be about 4 orders of magnitude more powerfull than a data center.

  20. Optical Computing by transami · · Score: 1

    They should be more involved in getting optical computing on the table. That more than any other tech will have a profound effect on energy requirements. And given some of the latest R&D, the tech is getting very close to reality.

    --
    :T:R:A:N:S:
    1. Re:Optical Computing by JeanBaptiste · · Score: 1

      They should be more involved in getting nuclear fusion on the table. That more than any other tech will have a profound effect on energy requirements. And given some of the latest R&D, the tech is getting very close to reality.

  21. Environmental concerns by nsayer · · Score: 1

    I thought the greeniacs were all up ons about nuclear plants using seawater for cooling because the heated exhaust invariably caused altered conditions at the point of discharge. And far be it from us horrible ebil humans to actually change the environment. That's just wrong.

    So what makes this different?

  22. A better headline by smartaleq · · Score: 1

    Using Your Data Center to Warm the Sea?

  23. Dealing with growth by supernes · · Score: 4, Funny

    Can't you just heat it up to sterilize it?

    1. Re:Dealing with growth by Obfuscant · · Score: 1
      Can't you just heat it up to sterilize it?

      Yeah, and then you can bring deep, cold seawater up from the depths of the ocean to cool it off, and bingo, cold sterile water!

    2. Re:Dealing with growth by TheGreenNuke · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You could... and thus defeat the purpose of using it as a coolant.

  24. Always wondered about ARSC's bill by Pvt_Waldo · · Score: 1

    During the winter, does the Arctic Regional Supercomputing Center spend money (energy) heating their offices while cooling off their computers at the same time?

  25. glaciers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hurray! bringing the warmth to the poles with even less inbetween steps! this efficiently gives us more melting water, which in turn can cool our datacenters even more. So at one point in the future you're google query is being cooled by water which once was ancient glacier ice. (that's alot of 'c-'s , which are those things which we were using in the first place to cool everything)

  26. not a thermal insulator and heat tax by goombah99 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Other than a set up for your gag, I don't see why you call paint a thermal insulator. It does not have to be so. many kinds of coating promote thermal coupling.

    One thing that does bother me is dumping waste heat in someone elses backyard for free promotes the inefficient use of energy. that is, I can decrease my cooling costs by using more efficient but more expensive computers which incidentally produce less waste heat, or I could use less expensive inefficient computers and take advantage of public domain cooling, like cayuga lake.

    Is Cornell paying a tax to use Cayuga lake as a heat dump? that would help internalize the economic externalities that drive them to consume more electricity because the cooling is free.

    likewise for sea water cooling.

    This might seem like worry much about a small thing: isn't the cooling resevoir comparatively infinite? the answer is surprising no, not only is it not infinite, it's never going to grow, and we have already saturated it in much or the US and Europe. For example the big limit on Nuclear power plant growth is now availability of cooling. SOme rivers in Tenesee are known to heat up to 80 degrees when the power plants operate a full power in summer.

    thus this needs to be publicly regulated now.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:not a thermal insulator and heat tax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up.

    2. Re:not a thermal insulator and heat tax by digitalunity · · Score: 1

      Paint doesn't have to be a thermal insulator, but many are. Like adhesives, there is a paint for everything.

      See my other comments re: ecological impact. You're right - the impact is non-negligible, even in seawater.

      --
      You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
    3. Re:not a thermal insulator and heat tax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You say that like organisms living in the water might object to a drastic change in the temperature of their environment.

      They can't object after we cook them in place.

    4. Re:not a thermal insulator and heat tax by registrar · · Score: 1

      One thing that does bother me is dumping waste heat in someone elses backyard for free promotes the inefficient use of energy.

      Ok, but for a given amount of heat generated, you may as well get rid of it in the most efficient way possible. "Free" i.e. cheap generally means less energy is expended in the dumping of the heat, and that's a good thing for everyone.

    5. Re:not a thermal insulator and heat tax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and we have already saturated it in much or the US and Europe.

      I call Bu!!sh!t

    6. Re:not a thermal insulator and heat tax by afidel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not sure of the specifics of Cayuga lake but if it's anything like the Great Lakes then there is a large area of cold water that is basically devoid of life. One recent plant used the incoming city water supply which is drawn from a cold deep region as a thermal sink, since the water was just going to heat to ground temperature anyways the net effect was slightly lower heat load on the earth surrounding the cities water pipes. Of course the energy sink potential isn't infinite, but it's potentially very large and if it reduces the one side of the energy equation by ~80% then that's all the fewer resources we have to use up. Pardon me if you take offense but you sound a bit like the people in the Greenpeace movement who can't see the forest for the trees, we need to take advantage of things like freecooling and nuclear power so we can reduce the immediate resource usage that is occurring. If we find better ways to do things down the road that's great going for cleaner (not clean) options today is better than waiting decades for something perfect to come about if ever. We aren't going back to hunter gatherers so we need to do what we can we the technology we have to minimize our impact.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    7. Re:not a thermal insulator and heat tax by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      SOme rivers in Tenesee are known to heat up to 80 degrees when the power plants operate a full power in summer.

      So? The local lake where I live was 80 for the 3 months this summer. No place in TN can be more than a 100 miles north or south of my latitude so 80 can't be THAT bad.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    8. Re:not a thermal insulator and heat tax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The added heat to the lake is negligible. Lake source cooling is very environmentally friendly.

      http://www.utilities.cornell.edu/utl_lscfacts.html

    9. Re:not a thermal insulator and heat tax by drenehtsral · · Score: 2, Informative

      Cayuga Lake is hard to talk about as just one ecosystem, because it has such a strange set of features... It is (like all of the Finger Lakes) a collection of water in the bottom of a glacial valley. Unlike many such lakes, however, Cayuga lake is VERY deep in places (over 400 feet deep), and there are (if I recall correctly) springs or caves or something like that at the bottom in the really deep parts. That being said, it also has a decent sized shallow shelf, and a bunch of small bays and swamps where various creeks discharge. It's the shelf-like area at the south end where the cooling intake and outlet pipes are.

      Much of the difficulty assessing whether the heat being pumped into the lake was going to have any negative impact or not had to do with the constant protesting by massive numbers of hysterical but scientifically illiterate hippies (if you've lived in Ithaca for a decade or more, you know who I am talking about). As sad as it is, because anything Cornell released or published was decried as bunk if it didn't damn the project, it didn't seem to matter any more what (if any) case they made to the community as a whole, so there wasn't much effort after some point to communicate anything clearly about this project. I don't blame them, it must have been like trying to piss out the sun getting those damn hippies to shut up long enough to have any sort of rational discussion.

      In any case, I doubt it has done nearly the harm that the late '70s and early '80s did when the city essentially pumped any excess sewage right into the lake with minimal if any treatment. In any case, I think a heat tax would be a good idea, but only if it were absolutely universally applied (Apply it to residential, commercial, public sector, and industrial waste-heat and in some sort of a meaningful and constant form (X cents per Y million Joules)).

      --

      ---
      Play Six Pack Man. I
    10. Re:not a thermal insulator and heat tax by SunTzuWarmaster · · Score: 1

      A coworker once asked me about geothermal energy usage in the context of limited resources in the form of: "Won't the Earth eventually run out of hot?"

      This is an early answer to that problem!

    11. Re:not a thermal insulator and heat tax by volxdragon · · Score: 2, Informative

      Oh god no, not another tax in Ithaca....I remember having to buy tax stickers that you applied to EACH trash bag you put out at the curb (and you had BETTER make sure there were absolutely zero recyclables in the bag or the trash people would shred the sticker and the bag leaving trash everywhere on your front lawn for you to deal with). Talk about a PITA...

      But you're right, the hippies up there make even the most left-wing liberals look centrist...

    12. Re:not a thermal insulator and heat tax by adf92343414 · · Score: 1

      Is Cornell paying a tax to use Cayuga lake as a heat dump?

      I toured the Lake Source Cooling project's (http://www.utilities.cornell.edu/utl_ldlsc.html) facility a few years ago. The project's director said that the amount of heat added to the lake in one year was roughly equal to the heat absorbed by the lake in 7 seconds of sunshine. Which, if I recall from my time in Ithaca, is roughly twice the amount of annual sunshine.

    13. Re:not a thermal insulator and heat tax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, given the existing issue of global warming and climate change, I wonder if anyone has thought through the consequences of warming these existing cool areas? Is it really just a free source of 'coolth'? Or are we going to screw up yet another ecosystem? Even more...

    14. Re:not a thermal insulator and heat tax by jmp_nyc · · Score: 1

      Data centers could learn a thing or two from Scottish distilleries.

      The process of distilling produces, as its waste product, absolutely pure water that is just below boiling temperature. There are rather strict environmental regulations that prohibit the distilleries from putting the water back into streams without first cooling it to the temperature of the stream. Different distilleries have come up with different solutions to this problem. Several of them maintain rather large, extremely shallow manmade lagoons, which quickly cool the water to much closer to air temperature as the water enters at one end and exits at the other. At Aberlour, they pour the water over a pile of large rocks, with the water being cool by the time it reaches the bottom. The most ingenious use is at Bowmore, where the water is used to heat an indoor public swimming pool run by the distillery for the local community.

      Yes, there's potential harm to ecosystems by releasing heated water into rivers/streams, but there are ways of cooling that water that are relatively inexpensive, some of which even adding virtually no operating costs once the capital expenditures are complete.
      -JMP

  27. Pollution by cybereal · · Score: 1

    For decades we've recognized this exact same kind of exploitation of coastal waters as pollution. Why would this suddenly be acceptable for a data-center, and how will they avoid the associate ecological devastation?

    --
    I read the script, and I think it would help my character's motivation if he was on fire. -Bender
  28. Solving the wrong problem by CityZen · · Score: 1

    Instead of figuring out better ways to cool hot datacenters, I think a better investment would be to figure out how to make the data centers run cooler in the first place.

    Each new generation of semiconductor technology typically allows 2 ways to improve: faster computing for same power, or less power for same computing.
    You'd think that at some point, the second choice makes more sense than the first.

    Of course, there is the problem of who can make these improvements. This is limited to the chip companies, whereas just about anyone who knows how to use a screwdriver can work on the cooling problem.

    I solved my own version of the problem by switching to notebook computers instead of desktops. I get disgusted every time I look at the power requirements of modern desktops: they burn over 100 watts when sitting idle. That's just stupid. Most notebooks don't use that much even running flat-out.

    I wonder how many data center boxes are burning 100 watts just sitting idle?

  29. Old news by malkir · · Score: 1

    Host Chopper has been using sea water to cool their data centers for at least a month now. Get with the times, Google..

  30. Another source of Global Warming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What when the cold currents run out of cold water due to overharvesting of the cold water from the cold currents? What will happen to ocean-life that depends on this cold water?

    1. Re:Another source of Global Warming by Noctris · · Score: 1

      We will have killed it.. just like we did with the other animals before them.. bow to your datacenter cooling overlords !

  31. Western USA reservoirs by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    I am amazed that for all the large number of reservoirs that western USA has, we never put heating/cooling coils in the bottom of these. Almost all from Colorado north contain snow melt and the bottom of these are around 40F (4C). It seems like many of these would be good places to run large pipes and simply use these for cooling AND heating. For example, Horsetooth reservoir of Ft. Collins could easily heat/cool a number of facilities and even a data center. Cherry creek, Chatfield, etc would also be capable of doing the same. Many of these are 100-200 f/40-70m deep. Nuts, taking it a step further, I am surprised that some of these nuke plants do not use this as a means of energy storage (2 side hydro plant) combined with the ability to dump heat on the hotter days.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Western USA reservoirs by zero0ne · · Score: 1

      don't forget Erie County, we have the Falls as well as the Hydro plant with their huge reservoir.

      (Maybe yahoo's datacenter will use that to help with cooling... oh wait, they are in Lockport)
       

  32. Hogtown has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Hogtown (Toronto, Canada) has done this for about 10 years. Not just datacenters, but downtown office buildings and hi-rises. A giant pipe (about 1 meter in diamenter) sucks water about 30 km/h in, and runs it through the buildings, keeping them cool in the summer. The reduction in cooling costs is about as others have described. There was a significant amount of research done do determine environmental and ecological impact prior to doing this. In the end, they noted the temperature of the water overall goes up about 1-2 degrees, but the mean water temperature does not increase year-on-year.

  33. What sea water is a bad idea and a better solution by John+Sokol · · Score: 1

    Cooling data centers accounts for almost 50% of the power consumption. This is a massive amount of energy used for cooling.

    But sea water has several disadvantages mostly keeping the system clean, barnacles, muscles and other small plants and animals will get sucked in to the system, and eventually clog up everything. It's also very corrosive. In addition hot water discharged from the system will hurt local ecosystems in both salt and freshwater systems.

    Using the Hull of a ship would solve the clogging problems, where there is a large mass of metal in which to dissipate heat without having to pump seawater. Even with paint, there is a massive amount of surface area on a ships hull.

    Still using seawater is still not a very good solution. Even is it's cost effective in reducing energy consumption.

    When I had my start-up Nisvara Inc.(2002 to 2006 RIP) we worked out that we could accomplish the same using nothing but chiller towers that just used evaporative cooling. In cooler climates like where we were based at NASA Ames Research Center in Mountain View Ca, we worked out that we could cool the largest computer cluster what would have been built at that time using nothing just large truck style radiators and fans. No compressors or any active cooling just circulating water or cooling fluid.

    A lot of data centers objected to the use of water because it would damage equipment. The Nisvara solution kept water in continuous copper tubes without any joints or seals. Still that wasn't enough to belay their fears of water contacting electricity, so we also found other suitable coolants such as using 3M Novec 1230 Fire Protection Fluid. It's amazing stuff. Totally green and safe also known as "Dry Water" and "Waterless Water", will not harm equipment and just happened that it could be used as a coolant too.

    It may even be useful as a refrigerant because it can phase change at a lower temperature then water, but this would have required more research.

    I write about this at my blog http://thegreentank.blogspot.com/2009/09/slashdot-using-sea-to-cool-your-data.html inspired by this slashdot post.

    --
    I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it. - Pablo Picasso
  34. express global warming (less the narrative) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yeah and that won't cause global warming. Well, at least it DIRECTLY heats the ocean so no lost words there...

  35. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember reading somewhere about a guy who pretty much took all the computer parts out of the case and stuck them in a plastic box and filled it with vegetable oil. Apparently the hard drive won't leak. And the device cooled by dissipating the heat into the oil. He then sealed the top and had only a few wires coming out. I wonder how that worked for him. I figure bigger computers would need more cooling so maybe you could stick the parts in oil in a glass aquarium, seal it up, and stick the aquarium in a lake or ocean to help cool the oil. Anyone heard anything like that?

    1. Re:Anonymous Coward by Noctris · · Score: 1

      no.. and i am guessing it has something to do with maintenance being a pain in the *ss .. with the submarines, divers and robot's and all..

    2. Re:Anonymous Coward by KC7JHO · · Score: 1

      I have actually done this, the hard drive can NOT be submerged as it does have an air vent to allow for pressure equilibration. The problem is that the oil will not dissipate the oil into the air as fast as the pc generates the heat, in a 10 gal tank my stock 2Ghz pc was good for about 12 hours before it locked up. I also tried attaching a 300GPM pump and a small radiator to help cool the oil but the pump can not circulate the oil fast enough and eventually burned out in about a month. I also attempted to replace the oil cooler with a closed loop water system but the PC gave out and I quit messing with it. Another thing DO NOT USE VEGETABLE OIL it will spoil and STINK! I used mineral oil and had no trouble except for cooling the oil.

      What about running the return / heated water over a small 'water fall' to take advantage of some evaporation cooling before returning it to the ocean. This would work better where the water already has to be pumped up to the level you wish to drop it from of course but why would it not help at least?

  36. ...like boiling the ocean... by evilsofa · · Score: 1

    Another useful idiom that we'll have to put away because we made it happen.

  37. Why not closed circuit? by cheros · · Score: 1

    I can't understand why they want to go through the trouble of pumping very corrosive seawater (with the occasional squid or barnacle in it) instead of just hanging a radiator in the sea and pump their own coolant through it.

    Did I miss something?

    --
    Insert .sig here. Send no money now. Owner may sue, contents will settle. Batteries not included.
    1. Re:Why not closed circuit? by Ksevio · · Score: 1

      If you look at the site, they have the part going to the buildings as a closed circuit, then an open system meeting up with it at an exchange system. I imagine this way they can use the ocean as a radiator and pull the much colder water from lower depths.

  38. nevermindweboilthefish by Noctris · · Score: 1

    They forgot the "nevermindweboilthefish" tag... fixed that for ya.. although this is probably a CO2 friendly way of global warming ...

  39. pipe materials? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why do the pipes have to be metal...

  40. Heating a swimming pool with a Cray! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the 1980s, my university had a Cray computer and a swimming pool. Some engineering students did the math: it was possible to bring the swimming pool to temperature using the cooling of the Cray. The only reason this did not happen was the two and a half kilometers between the pool and the calculation centre.

  41. there are multiple ways to sanitize water... by way2trivial · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You can keep pool water sterile/inhospitable with other methods

    o3 as used in pools should be ideal here- it disappears from the system very quickly.

    chlorine (bleach) does tend to sit around in the water and react longer, o3 is very toxic to life, but tends to obliviate itself

    a giant corona discharge wire on the inlet-- no?

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  42. Balancing Act by coolmoose25 · · Score: 1

    I've often thought that a good place for a data center would be adjacent to a hydro-electric plant. Hydro has it's disadvantages as an electrical generation source, but that ship has sailed so to speak (fish ladders, upstream and downstream shore effects). Given that we have them, we could use data centers to mitigate one of the existing environmental problems of hydro dams, namely cold water pollution.

    One of the effects of a hydro dam is that it releases very cold water downstream, much colder than the water would be if the dam were not there. Case in point is a trip I took with Scouts a few years ago. After portaging our canoes, we require everyone to wash with a grease cutting soap to mitigate the effects of any poison ivy we may have tromped through. Not a problem, as it is generally fun to jump into the fast moving water that is released at the base of a dam. The only problem is that the water is COLD. It comes from the bottom of the reservoir, so it is naturally colder than the water flowing normally. As an aside, we had some scouts from Bermuda with us, and when the first one jumped in, he came up barely able to breath because the water was so cold. I don't think he'd ever felt water that cold!

    Anyway, it seems to me that the water being released could be warmed before being discharged if there was a data center that could "harness the coldness" of that water. Seems to me, it would be a win, win - the data center would get free cooling for their servers, while at the same time it would be able to mitigate the coldness of that water. And the bonus is that co-located with a hydro dam, there is little chance that you'd lose power to the data center - utilities are good at making sure all their plants have good links to the grid... so you've killed something like 3 or 4 birds with one stone.

    --
    Brawndo: It's what plants crave!
  43. Was done before with UNIVAC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I interviewed folks that built the UNIVAC in Philadelphia in the 1950's. One installation was placed near a lake and water was piped in. After a while small fish got sucked in so they added a filter with a hand turned corkscrew to grind up the fish - it was cooled by fish bouillabaisse - true story - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXEVstPEZLs

  44. The pipes can be painted by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    There's no problem with painting the pipes coming in and out of the ocean - that would help, actually, as you want to maintain the cold temperature until the sea water reaches the heat exchanger on land. There you can use more expensive, non-rusting materials like stainless steel, aluminum (well it oxidizes but I don't know how much of a problem that is), or whatever in the heat exchanger. I think the real problem would be filtering out the other crap the intake pipe is likely to pick up that could damage whatever pump they're using and clog the heat exchanger. If the pipes are painted, paint chips could be another problem...I wonder if they could use PVC pipes?

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  45. That gives me an idea... by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    With setups like this, why not run the resulting warm/hot water through a Stirling engine to generate some electricity? It cools the water down to lessen any potential environmental impact and should produce some meaningful amount of power. Seems like a win/win. Maybe if the water falls from the data center they can run it through a turbine or water wheel too...

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel