Hacker News Reader

Comment by tptacek | Hacker News Reader

Even that 765 is like 0.04% of the water needed to irrigate Nebraska's ethanol corn crop alone. And ethanol is basically an agricultural proof-of-work function.

View on HN

Also even in the totally fake scenario where that water completely evaporates, it's just gonna rain on Iowa a bit more.

I guess it has to be said: it is not guaranteed that the water rains in the "right" spots for it to be useful freshwater again anymore. Dumb example: maybe the wind currents mean that the water simply comes back down downstream.

One shouldn't assume that evaporated water comes back into the system in the place you want it to. Water management orgs try to reduce loss from evaporation for a reason!

OK sure but this is like defense in depth. It's a negligible amount of water, most of it doesn't evaporate, and most of what does rains somewhere it's useful anyway. The actual damage here is microscopic.

You're literally on a thread just a comment or two from the water cost of producing ethanol. Why are you still talking about data center water evaporation? This is morally equivalent to worrying about the water consumption of Slip-N-Slides. Everything is a rounding error compared to agricultural misuse of water.

You can’t eat your algorithm.

So while pointing to agriculture and saying look there - those guys & gals way more than us it’s a red herring because we need food.

Sure improve efficiency of ag, but a better comp for water usage should be made. Reasonable people tune out.

you can't eat ethanol either, you burn it to create more global warming

That's why they talked about ethanol.

How does it compare to the water used growing alfalfa for export to Saudi Arabia?

"... and keep your hand up if your ethical, water saving stance means you've become vegan."

Reply on news.ycombinator.com