Ren’s most recent work focuses precisely on how AI is increasing water use. A large language model like OpenAI’s popular ChatGPT-3 must first be trained, a data and energy intensive process that can also boost water use. Ren found that training GPT-3 in Microsoft’s high-end data centers can directly evaporate 700,000 liters, or about 185,000 gallons, of water.
Once the AI model is in use, each inference, or response to queries, also requires energy and cooling, and that, too, is thirsty work. Ren and his colleagues estimate that GPT-3 needs to “drink” a 16-ounce bottle of water for roughly every 10-50 responses it makes, and when the model is fielding billions of queries, that adds up.
The researchers are saying otherwise. I tend to believe them
It’s very cool that you tend to believe them, but I’d like to understand how something in a closed loop is “evaporating” - that is physically impossible. I once heard they are planning to build datacenters in the ocean, but even then evaporation is unlikely as the datacenters won’t boil the ocean. The only way to make this work is if they submerge it in a small pond/lake or just flood the building, and keep dumping water into it - which is stupid aswell because there are MUCH better materials for that that are NOT conductive, like special oils, which are not water based.
So ye, believing researchers is one thing, but believing something that physically is not possible because it fits your narrative is stupid.
I mean, yes, it can evaporate - inside the loop. There is no “loss”. If you fill a container half way with water, seal it airtight, and boil it, the water inside it is converted to gas. But that doesn’t mean it’s gone, you can just cool it down to convert the gas back to a liquid. There is no “loss” as that would violate the law of conservation of mass, which explicitly states that mass cannot be created or destroyed in a closed system through ordinary physical or chemical processes.
However you twist it - a loss of water is completely impossible in a closed loop.
To all the people downvoting without explaining - drop me an explanation instead of just doing that. I’m more than willing to accept that I’m wrong if someone can just explain to me how I’m wrong.
Well there is. Depending on the space. It can evaporate to a point where there is equilibrium between the gas and liquid.
All that being said, you and I are thinking on a pretty small scale. We’re thinking of liquid cooling on a home PC. For that large a scale, I’m sure the cooling system is pumping from a large reservoir to consistently keep that large a system cool. So there very much is room for evaporation in such a system.
And again, the researchers have found this to be the case. I see what you’re saying, but I think you’re conceiving of a much smaller, closed loop system, where on a server farm, they are using something much more efficient than a closed loop system. I dunno, though. I’m thinking of what you’re saying and considering the findings, and trying to conceive of the way that it’s happening. That’s pretty much where I land on it
The researchers are saying otherwise. I tend to believe them
It’s very cool that you tend to believe them, but I’d like to understand how something in a closed loop is “evaporating” - that is physically impossible. I once heard they are planning to build datacenters in the ocean, but even then evaporation is unlikely as the datacenters won’t boil the ocean. The only way to make this work is if they submerge it in a small pond/lake or just flood the building, and keep dumping water into it - which is stupid aswell because there are MUCH better materials for that that are NOT conductive, like special oils, which are not water based.
So ye, believing researchers is one thing, but believing something that physically is not possible because it fits your narrative is stupid.
Evaporation, is my understanding. Even sealed containers have evaporation in heat conditions.
I mean, yes, it can evaporate - inside the loop. There is no “loss”. If you fill a container half way with water, seal it airtight, and boil it, the water inside it is converted to gas. But that doesn’t mean it’s gone, you can just cool it down to convert the gas back to a liquid. There is no “loss” as that would violate the law of conservation of mass, which explicitly states that mass cannot be created or destroyed in a closed system through ordinary physical or chemical processes.
However you twist it - a loss of water is completely impossible in a closed loop.
To all the people downvoting without explaining - drop me an explanation instead of just doing that. I’m more than willing to accept that I’m wrong if someone can just explain to me how I’m wrong.
Well there is. Depending on the space. It can evaporate to a point where there is equilibrium between the gas and liquid.
All that being said, you and I are thinking on a pretty small scale. We’re thinking of liquid cooling on a home PC. For that large a scale, I’m sure the cooling system is pumping from a large reservoir to consistently keep that large a system cool. So there very much is room for evaporation in such a system.
And again, the researchers have found this to be the case. I see what you’re saying, but I think you’re conceiving of a much smaller, closed loop system, where on a server farm, they are using something much more efficient than a closed loop system. I dunno, though. I’m thinking of what you’re saying and considering the findings, and trying to conceive of the way that it’s happening. That’s pretty much where I land on it