• FauxLiving@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    200
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    23 hours ago

    generate the waste heat of 23 atom bombs a day.

    Americans will do anything but use the metric system.

    • cdf12345@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Listen guy, maybe you haven’t noticed, but we have some serious fuckery we are trying to deal with here. While I agree that metric is a more logical system. We’re trying to get a grip while everything around us is crumbling. Switching to metric is in like volume 17 of our todo list right now, sandwiched between end daylight savings time and making the my pillow guy eat a sock.

        • badgermurphy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          38 minutes ago

          Sounds like he’s talking about Americans. I don’t think “frog personhood” has been established there at this time, unless one owns a corporation.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 hours ago

      9GW is first. That’s metric. The other number is to give an estimate that is more relatable.

      • assa123@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        but first is peak power, not waste energy, we’re still missing the SI estimated number of Wh wasted per day

        • badgermurphy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          40 minutes ago

          If they can tell us how many “atom bombs” per day it takes to power it, at least we could figure it out!

      • Tja@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Yeah, who doesn’t know the heat of an atom bomb? (which famously can vary by 4 orders of magnitude)

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Well, everyone knows it’s at least a lot. That’s the point. Most people don’t know what 9GW means, in terms of heat. Even a small nuclear bomb it’s enough to vaporized a large area. This tells even the least informed person that it’s an amount of energy that should be concerning.

        • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          which famously can vary by 4 orders of magnitude

          That’s why “Hiroshima” is now a unit. We’re lucky “Tsar Bomba” isn’t.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      61
      ·
      20 hours ago

      At least in this case it gets across the truly stupid amount of energy being wasted. As a general rule I think that if you can boil one of the great lakes with your daily thermal output you probably shouldn’t be doing it.

          • Greyghoster@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            19 hours ago

            17gw is about the same size as the Hiroshima bomb - 63 terajoules is 17 GWh and the 9GW data centre produces at least 16GWs of heat. Pretty scary when looked at like that.

            • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 hours ago

              17gw of heat is both under and over estimate.

              3,600 of those industrial-scale generators to power Stratos

              Caterpillar 2.5mw generators have maximum efficiency of 45%, and so 19gw is peak thermal power. that is roughly 26 hiroshimas per day.

              It’s an over estimate because datacenter cpu/gpu capacity utilization is on average under 10%. It could still produce all that power for export to trap all that heat in a valley.

            • Pulsar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              5 hours ago

              Not that it would matter for this conversation, but at hyperscalers levels, the energy required for mechanical loads is under 20% of the compute load. Wouldn’t surprise me if ~10% can be achieved at multi GW scale. Thus about 11GW total energy.

            • towerful@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 hours ago

              Does “9GW data center” not mean “a data center that consumes 9GW of power”?
              Or is it “9GW of computers + 5GW of cooling + something”?

              • Pulsar@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                5 hours ago

                9GW should be the compute load goal, to which you need to add the mechanical and administrative loads. At higher scales they gain significant efficiencies which translates to market advantages.

      • osbo9991@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        50
        ·
        edit-2
        20 hours ago

        Let’s assume Costco size hot dogs (1/4 lb, or 0.11 kg), with an internal temp increase from fridge temperatures (37 F, or 276 K) to 165 F (347 K). Let’s also assume the heat capacity of the hot dog is about 3000 J/kg*K. To heat up a single hot dog takes this much energy:

        q=mc*deltaT => q=(0.11 kg)*(3000 J/kg*K)*(347K-276K)=23,430 J of energy.

        The heat capacity here is 9GW. That is 9 gigajoules of energy per second, or 9 billion joules every second. Divide this by the number of joules to cook each hot dog gets us the number of hot dogs that could be cooked every second:

        9,000,000,000/23,430=384,123 hot dogs/second

        With this hot dogs per second figure, we can find how long this energy source would take to feed the entire US population a Costco hot dog.

        342,000,000 people/384,123 hot dogs per sec=890 seconds

        Converting this to minutes:

        890/60=14.8 minutes

        So, this source of energy could feed the entire population of the US a Costco hot dog in less than 15 minutes if properly harnessed.

        • Baggie@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          19 hours ago

          The math you just did terrifies me and I have no way of verifying it, so I’ll just say good job and leave it at that.

        • eatCasserole@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          19 hours ago

          I think it’s also important to have a hotdogs per day figure, and the math from here is super simple, so I can do it.

          384,1236060*24 = 33,188,227,200 hot dogs per day.

        • OldManWithACane@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          14 hours ago

          So if she weighs the same as a duck… then she’s made of wood…

          and therefore…

          A WITCH!! BURN HER!!

    • XLE@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Sometimes you have to cater to the lowest common denominator (the AI booster).