Concerns about inconsequential water usage at datacenters is a far more welcome problem for the the industry than the other real issues they could be dealing with. People distracted by water concerns will not notice the very real energy usage and AI ethics/practices issues.

Say what you want but the industry has figured out how to manage public perception and sentiment. Water usage problem is easy to fix, while energy usage is a far tougher nut to crack.

The company that literally named itself after a river and the threatened habitat it runs through.

What happens to water that a data center “uses”? Is it warmed up and returned to the environment? Contaminated and sent to wastewater? Evaporated into the air?

> Amazon’s data centres were projected to use 7.7 billion gallons of water a year by 2030, according to the leaked strategy memo, which was circulated within the company in 2022.

From https://www.usgs.gov/water-science-school/science/total-wate...:

> Water use in the United States in 2015 was estimated to be about 322 billion gallons per day (Bgal/d), which was 9 percent less than in 2010.

It doesn't seem to be very much water at all.

The level of obsession some people have over data center water usage is completely unhinged.

> a commitment to “return more water than it uses by 2030”.

How would that even be possible?

Dumb question, but is this done with fresh water?

If so, why?

If not, does it matter how much water is used?

Sensing this is the new global warming threat replacement

[dupe] Some more discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45710025

""It would be better if they could own up to it," said a current Amazon software developer, who asked to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation. "Even if they said it was a low priority, at least that would be honest.""

HN commentary on water use by so-called "tech" companies usually includes a number of mindlessly-parroted, bad faith "arguments"

One of these is to try to compare the new (additive) water use by non-essential data centers with existing (non-additive) water use by agriculture

Putting aside that (a) data centers are non-essential and not comparable to food, water or shelter and (b) agricultural use is not new, these "arguments" are also ignoring that (c) the so-called "tech" companies are trying to hide the data

Employees of these so-called "tech" companies might be experiencing guilt over this dishonest tactic, but not enough to make them quit

When their employer hides the data this makes accurate comparisons, e.g., to existing water use by other recipients, difficult if not impossible

Does agriculture also try to hide its water use

If it did, then HN comments could not attempt bad faith comparisons

Because there would be no data to cite