Reminds me of how the “1800 gallons for one burger” statistic uses annual rainfall to calculate that as if it was captured, stored, and used from our kitchen sinks.
Also if you’re curious cows drink water, 9-20 gallons a day, and in the typical 1-2 year lifespan, that amounts to 3,285 on the conservative side, or up to 14,000 gallons in hot climates, per cow. And depending on the cut, some 800 quarter pound patties, and using that conservative 1 year 9 gallons a day, that is about…
4 gallons per burgers worth of meat. That total 3,000-14,000 gal/cow water usage is certainly an issue, especially in hot climates, but why make up bullshit?
Because statistics like those often ignore the fact the water they’re calculating is inaccessible for other uses. They calculate the rainwater used to make the grass grow, water we don’t collect nor have available for other uses, but it makes the number higher and shocking. If you see “14,000 gallons of water per cow” you think that’s how much water we’ve “lost” when in reality, it’s a massive bucket of rainwater they’re drinking out of, not a hit to our irrigation or water treatment facilities.
It’s a misleading statistic meant to shock and manipulate you into a specific way of thinking, a lot like your original comment. I don’t give a shit how much rainwater a cow drinks, I care about how much is being pulled from local irrigation. Rainwater is going to lay in the dirt and evaporate anyway so why is that being calculated? If the answer to how much water is being pulled from our infrastructure is nearly zero, that’s how many fucks I dedicate to it.
Should datacenters be operating in silicon valley where water is already scarce? No. But people shouldn’t also be living in a fucking desert, overdrawing from the river that lets anyone live there, so maybe they should move. Not like they can’t afford to.
This is the tech you’re all afraid of?
Evaporated 20 gallons of water in Nevada for this
Reminds me of how the “1800 gallons for one burger” statistic uses annual rainfall to calculate that as if it was captured, stored, and used from our kitchen sinks.
What’s that got to do with datacenters using evaporative cooling?
Also if you’re curious cows drink water, 9-20 gallons a day, and in the typical 1-2 year lifespan, that amounts to 3,285 on the conservative side, or up to 14,000 gallons in hot climates, per cow. And depending on the cut, some 800 quarter pound patties, and using that conservative 1 year 9 gallons a day, that is about…
4 gallons per burgers worth of meat. That total 3,000-14,000 gal/cow water usage is certainly an issue, especially in hot climates, but why make up bullshit?
Because statistics like those often ignore the fact the water they’re calculating is inaccessible for other uses. They calculate the rainwater used to make the grass grow, water we don’t collect nor have available for other uses, but it makes the number higher and shocking. If you see “14,000 gallons of water per cow” you think that’s how much water we’ve “lost” when in reality, it’s a massive bucket of rainwater they’re drinking out of, not a hit to our irrigation or water treatment facilities.
It’s a misleading statistic meant to shock and manipulate you into a specific way of thinking, a lot like your original comment. I don’t give a shit how much rainwater a cow drinks, I care about how much is being pulled from local irrigation. Rainwater is going to lay in the dirt and evaporate anyway so why is that being calculated? If the answer to how much water is being pulled from our infrastructure is nearly zero, that’s how many fucks I dedicate to it.
Should datacenters be operating in silicon valley where water is already scarce? No. But people shouldn’t also be living in a fucking desert, overdrawing from the river that lets anyone live there, so maybe they should move. Not like they can’t afford to.
You should learn about thermodynamics
You should learn how to structure a retort.
I’m just matching effort 🤷♂️
Three paragraphs to one line. I know you might have trouble with size comparisons, but do your best little guy.