Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bangladesh Considers Building World's 5th-largest Data Center In Earthquake Zone

Posted by samzenpus on from the whole-lot-of-shaking-going-on dept.

An anonymous reader writes with news about a government plan to build a Tier IV data center in an earthquake prone district of Bangladesh. The Bangladesh Ministry of Information is considering the establishment of a Tier 4 data centre in Kaliakair, in the Gazipur region, an ambitious build which would constitute the fifth largest data centre in the world, if completed. And if it survives – the site planned for the project is prone to earthquakes. Earthquake activity in the environs is discouraging, with one nearby earthquake seven months ago in Ranir Bazar (3.8), and no less than ten within the same tectonic zone over the last three years, the largest of which measured 4.5 on the Richter scale.

22 of 65 comments (clear)

  1. And the probability of serious quakes is? by Z00L00K · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And what is the probability of serious earthquakes in the area?

    In Bangladesh I would be more worried about flooding and power reliability.

    --
    If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    1. Re:And the probability of serious quakes is? by TWX · · Score: 2

      Everyone said I was daft to build a datacenter on an earthquake-prone swamp, but I built in all the same, just to show them. It sank into the swamp. So I built a second one. That sank into the swamp. So I built a third. That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp. But the fourth one stayed up. And that's what you're going to get, Lad, the strongest datacenter in all of Bangladesh.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  2. as opposed to SanFran and LA? by nadaou · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Good thing there are no tech companies along the San Andreas!

    And before anyone goes on to say that M3s and M4s are an order of magnitude or two smaller than a M5, the energy is more like 32 times more intense for each magnitude level, it's not log10.

    --
    ~.~
    I'm a peripheral visionary.
    1. Re:as opposed to SanFran and LA? by Sique · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A 4.5 is similar in intensity to an heavy truck driving along your home.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
  3. Come on - a 4.5 is nothing by Harlequin80 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The tabloid journalism is strong in this one. A 4.5 magnitude quake is utterly insignificant when it comes to structural design. If this project is as large as promised it will be designed by serious engineers to withstand significant quakes and not even notice something in the 4s.

    From wikipedia

    4.0–4.9 Light IV to VI
    Noticeable shaking of indoor objects and rattling noises. Felt by most people in the affected area. Slightly felt outside. Generally causes none to minimal damage. Moderate to significant damage very unlikely. Some objects may fall off shelves or be knocked over.

    Frequency of occurrance - 10,000 to 15,000 per year

    1. Re:Come on - a 4.5 is nothing by EvanED · · Score: 3, Informative

      Let's do some back-of-the-envelope calculations. Based on http://earthquaketrack.com/bd-... (linked from TFA), I count five quakes in the last 3 years that are moderately close. (I'm counting the red, blue, and pink markers to the left, and orange and brown a little to the east; the latter are a bit questionable.) All of them are in the 4s in magnitude.

      As a rough estimation (admittedly one that will probably diverge exponentially in any error), if you increase the magnitude 1 level, you decrease the frequency by a factor of ten. So five 4s in 3 years means you'd expect one in the 5s every 6 years or so, and in the 6s every 60.

      Now, a moderate 6 quake is at the point where you have to explicitly build to resist earthquakes. So from this (very, on a number of axes) rough guess, it seems like they definitely need to consider the possibility... but it's also not something that is likely to present a huge challenge or anything.

    2. Re:Come on - a 4.5 is nothing by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A 4.5 magnitude quake is utterly insignificant when it comes to structural design.

      Indeed. I live in the SF Bay Area. A 4.5 is enough to wake you up if you are a light sleeper, but will not cause damage to anything.

    3. Re:Come on - a 4.5 is nothing by rtb61 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's a 'major' data centre, I would be worried about getting data in and getting data out. It really makes no sense to build one huge data centre and have it reliant on localised, power, staff, weather, tectonic stability and all those communications cables coming in and going out. Having to shift huge amounts of data very long distances. As the amount of data rises, so the idea of building data centres to service each and every capital city around the world makes a whole lot more sense. This enables full mirroring of international data services, distributed back up of any data centre across other data centres and full content distribution services and even the contracted provision of game servers. Building many distributed data centres enables you to do many more things and of course localise those data centres in terms of government regulations and avoid a range of judicially or law enforcement inspired issues. How small a population should be served with a data centre, that really depends on how much you get into those other data handling services, like mirroring, game serving and content distribution, localising that traffic saves a huge amount of money and, local sales staff always benefits sales and allows you to tweak services for that locale.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    4. Re:Come on - a 4.5 is nothing by Megol · · Score: 2

      That is true. But the technical know-how how to reduce even stronger earthquake strength inside a building is well know - the extreme example is of course those structures made to tolerate human-created earthquakes: "ground zero" type nuclear bunkers. Less extreme but still relevant is buildings for micro-fabrication (integrated circuits).
      Protecting HDDs from earthquakes is simple in comparison.

    5. Re:Come on - a 4.5 is nothing by tomhath · · Score: 2

      I'm pretty sure that is exactly why this data center is being built. Hype that it's going to be the "World's 5-Largest data center" doesn't mean much. Data centers are getting bigger all the time so of course it's bigger than older ones.

  4. No worries by cstec · · Score: 3, Funny

    I was totally good with storing private customer data in Bangladesh before.

    1. Re:No worries by sociocapitalist · · Score: 2

      I was totally good with storing private customer data in Bangladesh before.

      How good are you about your own private data being stored in Bangladesh?

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
  5. Re:Earthquakes arent the issue - by raymorris · · Score: 2

    Lack of adherence to codes? Whatever do you mean?

    https://peters365photos.files....

  6. Oh my goodness! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I am being so sorry mister American Looking For A Cheap IT Fix!
    Our entire data center was at the epicenter of last weeks earthquake and has disappeared into a sinkhole!
    Backup facility? What American bullshit you are speaking to me! Were you not paying bottom dollar?
    Oh yes. And we are being sued by the families of all of the underpaid technician workers who we had leg-shacked to their desks, which were bolted into the floors. They too went down with the building!
    What? Responding to your emails? No no no! We are in the process of dissolving the company, setting up new false identities and reincorporating elsewhere! Would you like a quote when we are set up for business?

  7. It's perfectly fine by pokoteng · · Score: 2

    As long as the risk is identified, mitigated with good engineering, and costs from extra engineering are acceptable, there's no issue here.

    --
    the game
  8. Re:As long as they don't... by ls671 · · Score: 2, Informative

    No problems, they plan to construct it 500 yards downstream from the dam in order to avoid power loss during transmission.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    --
    Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
  9. They must really like segfaults by kruach+aum · · Score: 4, Funny

    Thanks folks, I'll be here all week.

  10. "Simple" solution by Dutchmaan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Create an artificial lake and build the structure floating on it. Use the water for cooling and for shock protection from earthquakes.

  11. Re:Factual inaccuracie by Harlequin80 · · Score: 3

    You seem to have forgotten that all risks have a probability factor as well. That quake was huge, and very rare. Yeah they happen, but what is the life expectancy of the facility? 50 years? There will be a probability associated with earthquake risk during that period, does the risk out weigh the other benefits? Whether that probability is accurate is an entirely different question but it still exists.

    Otherwise every seismic sensitive structure would be built in the centre of Australia.

  12. Re:Wrong measurement by Z00L00K · · Score: 2

    For anyone more interested in the subject of moment magnitude and Richter scale I suggest that you read Is the Richter Scale Obsolete?.

    For practical purposes it's the effects at ground level that are important anyway.

    --
    If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
  13. Re:Really...? by RabidReindeer · · Score: 2

    I take it you missed this "minor" incindent, then:: http://www.theguardian.com/wor...

    Anyway, good building standards don't count if you can easily bribe the inspectors.

  14. 50% literacy rate? by gelfling · · Score: 2

    Half the population lives below even THEIR poverty line? Every year about a million of them die from drowing, malaria etc. And of course PsychoIslam Headchopping is making significant inroads. I really can't think of a more pointless idea than this.