Record Sized Data Center Planned Inside Arctic Circle

monkeymagick

[H]News
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
480
Kolos, a US-Norwegian company is planning to build a rather large data center located inside the Arctic Circle. Located in Ballangen, Norway, the area would provide chilled air and locally "abundant hydropower" will help keep energy costs down. Initial plans are to start with about 70 MW of power and expanding to more than 1,000 MW. The facility will span about 148 acres.

Amazon's data processing division is already thought to draw on about 1,000 MW of power in Ashburn, Virginia, however its servers are spread across the area rather than being clustered together into a single centre.

"But in terms of data centres, it's hard to see consumer-driven demands dropping off and there's the promise of the internet-of-things, with millions of sensors generating information that will need to be processed.
 
Will we be able to say "global warming" is man made then?
No amount of evidence will persuade someone who has religion. I mean anyone who looks at this:



and thinks us burning 135 billion barrels of oil, supporting the highest human and cattle population in history, and having record deforestation all adds up to us having no impact is seeing whatever they want to. It's a religious argument now, that's all there is to it.
 
No amount of evidence will persuade someone who has religion. I mean anyone who looks at this:



and thinks us burning 135 billion barrels of oil, supporting the highest human and cattle population in history, and having record deforestation all adds up to us having no impact is seeing whatever they want to. It's a religious argument now, that's all there is to it.

agreed... why are people so hard headed about this. if turning on ten computers in an office can warm up the room, why wouldn't millions of them do more harm!
 
We don't need this. We don't want this. Make it stop. Do we really need new datacenters built to process input from everyones fridge and toaster?

NO WE DONT

I need a fridge that automatically takes photos of my food for me, applies a colour filter, and uploads it to Instagram.
 
We have too much ice up there we need to melt it......lets place 1000 MW data center on the polar cap and melt it faster!!




/s
 
Well, for once when the server freezes it won't be because of overheating.
 
putting a permanent heat source on a ice form that is shrinking already seems smart.
 
We have too much ice up there we need to melt it......lets place 1000 MW data center on the polar cap and melt it faster!!




/s

Well, yeah. We are slowly becoming a proud, sea-faring race from a water planet! We just have to evolve better UV protection and we're all set!
 
No amount of evidence will persuade someone who has religion. I mean anyone who looks at this:



and thinks us burning 135 billion barrels of oil, supporting the highest human and cattle population in history, and having record deforestation all adds up to us having no impact is seeing whatever they want to. It's a religious argument now, that's all there is to it.

I sea a cycle of things getting a tad warming in the arctic circle. I don't see how the relation between man made climate change and the arctic circle is directly related.
I mean if you want to fully discount the medieval warm period in which the arctic circle was warmer than it was today because of course the tons of oil being burned and the co2 those medieval peoples were generating, then sure, i guess it could be considered unprecedented.
Btw, i'm all for a good solution to burning oil for power, which is nuclear (until fusion becomes viable).
 
Using hydro to run computers creates no net difference in heat - the water gives up 1000MW of potential energy when it gives up height, either in a turbine or along a river.

Hydro also releases no carbon.

Because science. Or do I just not realize everyone is trolling/joking?

B/C if you want to troll, Iceland has data centers powered by volcanoes - just like Mordor. And there is no denying all the kings of man are bound by teh interwebs, so there you go
 
I sea a cycle of things getting a tad warming in the arctic circle.
Yeah, the majority of old ice in that region melting is a "tad warmer"

Gigus Fire said:
I mean if you want to fully discount the medieval warm period in which the arctic circle was warmer than it was today because of course the tons of oil being burned and the co2 those medieval peoples were generating, then sure, i guess it could be considered unprecedented.
It's not worth it for me getting into the details anymore, but this talks about it more in detail so I don't have to:

https://www.skepticalscience.com/medieval-warm-period-intermediate.htm

In addition to what that covers, another thing to keep in mind is the medieval warming period was about 300 years, that video is happening in about 30.

Gigus Fire said:
I don't see how the relation between man made climate change and the arctic circle is directly related.
And this kind of says it all.
 
Yeah, the majority of old ice in that region melting is a "tad warmer"

It's not worth it for me getting into the details anymore, but this talks about it more in detail so I don't have to:

https://www.skepticalscience.com/medieval-warm-period-intermediate.htm

In addition to what that covers, another thing to keep in mind is the medieval warming period was about 300 years, that video is happening in about 30.

And this kind of says it all.
A simple video is not proof of a direct correlation between man made climate change and naturally occurring climate cycles.
We have no real data for how fast the climate changed in the medieval warming period. The fact that it lasted 300 years is known due to measurements, but it's nothing like the satellites recording ice melts as in your video. 30 years is way too small of a data set to accurately predict the future patterns.
 
No amount of evidence will persuade someone who has religion. I mean anyone who looks at this:



and thinks us burning 135 billion barrels of oil, supporting the highest human and cattle population in history, and having record deforestation all adds up to us having no impact is seeing whatever they want to. It's a religious argument now, that's all there is to it.


Although there are religious fanatics who can't see past their texts, it doesn't mean everyone who is religious is blind to reality. But I think you also think all conservatives are religious and all Republicans are conservatives.

Maybe it's just some people like to label others, so that they can put them into nice little piles, in order to ridicule them and feel superior.
 
putting a permanent heat source on a ice form that is shrinking already seems smart.


Wait up, the problem with shrinking ice isn't because anyone needs the ice. It's because the shrinking ice is an indication that the planet is warming.

But I will say this, I get that finding cheaper ways to cool a data center sounds smart, in the short run. But as long as we are going to collect all that energy, and use it to run the data center, couldn't we find something worthwhile to use that heat for? Maybe turn a turbine or two, pump the heat to some green houses and grow some food, put some O2 back in the air, something better than just melt ice.
 
Wait up, the problem with shrinking ice isn't because anyone needs the ice. It's because the shrinking ice is an indication that the planet is warming.

But I will say this, I get that finding cheaper ways to cool a data center sounds smart, in the short run. But as long as we are going to collect all that energy, and use it to run the data center, couldn't we find something worthwhile to use that heat for? Maybe turn a turbine or two, pump the heat to some green houses and grow some food, put some O2 back in the air, something better than just melt ice.

Those are the types of areas that we should really be researching more. Ways to harness the things that can be worrisome, or dangerous to make them work for us on a large scale. I mean, we do in fact do this, but typically on a small enough scale to where it doesn't really balance out.
 
This seems like a good plan to me. Plenty of hydro power made by cold water powering a power hungry data center that needs cooling. Maybe Alaska should look into this.
 
Although there are religious fanatics who can't see past their texts, it doesn't mean everyone who is religious is blind to reality. But I think you also think all conservatives are religious and all Republicans are conservatives.

Maybe it's just some people like to label others, so that they can put them into nice little piles, in order to ridicule them and feel superior.
I meant it in a figurative sense, not necessarily literally. By "religious", I don't mean they necessarily think it's connected to their belief in god, but that it's a concept being taken on faith, not evidence. In a rational debate, you examine the evidence and try to come to the truth by preponderence of evidence, most sound logic, etc. In someone finds themselves to be in error via bad sources of information, they can change their mind from rational discourse or cause them to understand their stance more thoroughly so it can be better defended or else discarded. In a religious debate, you can still offer up evidence, but that's just window dressing. If someone takes an issue ON FAITH, then no amount of evidence will ever change that person's view. You can show satellite photos of the earth as round, show how we calculate its size with math, etc. and it won't matter. If they think the Earth is flat, the Earth is flat and that's all there is to it.

As for your other examples, no I I don't think all conservatives are religious, however you got me, I DO think almost all Republicans are conservative however, particularly on economic issues. But by all means, prove me wrong, I'd love to see some examples of economically liberal Republicans (who support issues like a strong safety net, strong regulation of business, increased investment in public schools & libraries, progressive taxation of the wealthy, etc.), I can only imagine what that looks like.
 
Well, yeah. We are slowly becoming a proud, sea-faring race from a water planet! We just have to evolve better UV protection and we're all set!

Waterworld II: A Sea of Things™, with Kevin Costner once again leading us to prosperity! Just not sure who could play Trump since Dennis Hopper is dead now.

waterworld.18838.jpg
 
Last edited:
I meant it in a figurative sense, not necessarily literally. By "religious", I don't mean they necessarily think it's connected to their belief in god, but that it's a concept being taken on faith, not evidence. In a rational debate, you examine the evidence and try to come to the truth by preponderence of evidence, most sound logic, etc. In someone finds themselves to be in error via bad sources of information, they can change their mind from rational discourse or cause them to understand their stance more thoroughly so it can be better defended or else discarded. In a religious debate, you can still offer up evidence, but that's just window dressing. If someone takes an issue ON FAITH, then no amount of evidence will ever change that person's view. You can show satellite photos of the earth as round, show how we calculate its size with math, etc. and it won't matter. If they think the Earth is flat, the Earth is flat and that's all there is to it.

As for your other examples, no I I don't think all conservatives are religious, however you got me, I DO think almost all Republicans are conservative however, particularly on economic issues. But by all means, prove me wrong, I'd love to see some examples of economically liberal Republicans (who support issues like a strong safety net, strong regulation of business, increased investment in public schools & libraries, progressive taxation of the wealthy, etc.), I can only imagine what that looks like.


I want to say here first, that you surprised me a little. I took your earlier comment mostly as an attack, and I hate bullies, so I started an attack of my own. Your response shows that you are anything but a bully. I too can look at sound evidence and change my views accordingly.

I offer the only evidence I know to support an argument that there are indeed, liberal Republicans........No matter how many Republicans have sat in the chair over the last decade, how often does the government get any smaller.

I just figure that if we had a really conservative Republic calling the shots that something other than my bank account should be shrinking a little :confused:
 
In response to the actual article: cool.

Although there are religious fanatics who can't see past their texts, it doesn't mean everyone who is religious is blind to reality. But I think you also think all conservatives are religious and all Republicans are conservatives.

Maybe it's just some people like to label others, so that they can put them into nice little piles, in order to ridicule them and feel superior.

You're right, in that not all the religious people are blind to human-driven climate change. But all of the ones who are, tend to be for belief-oriented reasons. See the assimilation bias statements presented here: https://www.newscientist.com/articl...and-faulty-thinking-to-tackle-climate-change/
 
I want to say here first, that you surprised me a little. I took your earlier comment mostly as an attack, and I hate bullies, so I started an attack of my own. Your response shows that you are anything but a bully. I too can look at sound evidence and change my views accordingly.

I offer the only evidence I know to support an argument that there are indeed, liberal Republicans........No matter how many Republicans have sat in the chair over the last decade, how often does the government get any smaller.

I just figure that if we had a really conservative Republic calling the shots that something other than my bank account should be shrinking a little :confused:
Yeah I guess I should have clarified, sorry about that. I see the Republican distinction thing mostly as noise anyway, both parties are the party of business and big money now. I see prominent figures of both parties clueless at best, traitors at worst. I mean hey, off the top of my head, I can name a few things that BOTH liberals and conservatives want, but that neither party would ever pass (closing tax loopholes, cracking down on illegal immigrant employers, not allowing banks to speculate AND bail them out, etc). We don't really have parties that represent the people, but that's a separate topic. Hell, I could be a liberal Republican if you went back far enough. I would take an Eisenhower or Teddy Roosevelt over any Democrat the party's served up the past couple decades.
 
Last edited:
Waterworld II: A Sea of Things™, with Kevin Costner once again leading us to prosperity! Just not sure who could play Trump since Dennis Hopper is dead now.

waterworld.18838.jpg

The other possibility is a twisted version of Wind Waker. :D
 
Back
Top