Data centers, the things that physically store and share applications and data, require an enormous amount of energy to run. These giant storage units, responsible for 1-1.5% of global electricity consumption, have traditionally relied on renewable sources like solar and wind but it seems as though renewable energy just won’t be able to keep up with the demand required moving forward.

  • Goku
    link
    1
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I could be wrong but I thought rate of decay was a logarithmic function, not exponential.

    • @pizzazz
      link
      1
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Rate of decay for a specific isotope is constant, so its abundance decays exponentially. Of course a species can transmute in a new radionuclide so the process in total will not be exactly exponential, but pretty close. Seen on a log scale it’s awfully close to a straight line

      • Goku
        link
        1
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        This link shows that the number of nuclides decreases at a slower rate as time goes on. Opposite of an exponential function.

        As time progresses the rate at which the nuclear waste decays into innert matter is slower and slower. This is not at all an exponential rate.

        So I don’t think it’s correct to say “loses its harm exponentially.”

        It “loses its harm” more slowly as time goes on

        https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-physics/chapter/31-5-half-life-and-activity/

        • @pizzazz
          link
          111 months ago

          Sorry what? That link literally explains the exponential decay of radioisotopes.

          • Goku
            link
            111 months ago

            Exponential decay is not the same as “exponentially losing its harm”

            It very slowly “loses its harm” and as time progresses, it gets even slower.

            The inverse of an exponential function is still an exponential function.

            • @pizzazz
              link
              1
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              The harm of ionizing radiation is given by the activity of the source. Which decays exponentially. You should not go on the internet lecturing people you don’t know about things you don’t understand.

              Also, you moved the goalpost: first you claimed waste “doesn’t decay exponentially” and then without acknowledging it, you now claim that “exponential decay is not the same as losing harm exponentially”

              • Goku
                link
                111 months ago

                I concede that it is exponential and not logarithmic, but the original statement of yours “loses its harm exponentially” is what got us going down this tangent. I think that statement is misleading, because the truth is that the waste loses its harm exponentially slower as time goes on.

                • @pizzazz
                  link
                  1
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  I don’t think you understand the concept of exponential, or radioactivity for that matter tbh. The statement is completely truthful.

                  • Goku
                    link
                    111 months ago

                    Lol OK buddy, I went to school for this and worked in a power plant.