this post was submitted on 19 May 2026
234 points (96.8% liked)

Technology

84796 readers
3607 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] otter@lemmy.ca 75 points 16 hours ago (3 children)

It would probably take more energy than we can harvest on earth, considering the sunlight and geothermal energy doesn't boil it currently.

I could see it affecting the temperature on local scales, such as the area immediately around the data center.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 9 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

I don't think people mean literally boil the ocean. Just increasing it by few Celsius degrees can be world ending.

[–] otter@lemmy.ca 4 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

That's true, but I still don't think we can raise ocean temperatures through direct cooling and renewable sources the way that the greenhouse effect can. Water can absorb a lot of heat energy without changing temperature, and that is why regions close to oceans have a more temperate climate.

While I don't have enough knowledge in this field to be making any definitive statements, my logic is as follows:

  • outside of nuclear fission/fusion reactions, heat energy on the earth's surface comes from either the sun or molten rock in the core
  • that energy is responsible for everything that happens on earth, including wind energy

So we would need to get energy from off planet, use nuclear fission/fusion, or cover enough of the land area in wind and solar farms in order to redirect the sun's energy over to the oceans.

I think the bigger concern, when it comes to heating the ocean, is that manufacturing, construction, and transport related to the data centers still releases a lot of greenhouse gases. Those gases trap the sun's energy within our atmosphere and that WILL heat up the earth. Way more than direct cooling using ocean water.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 1 points 24 minutes ago* (last edited 24 minutes ago)

I'm a scuba diver and you can definitely harm regions of ocean with water pumps. It's already happening in place where nuclear is being cooled. It's already happening in ship yards.

It's hard to speculate how it would happen at scale though because ocean science is real fucking hard and each location is vastly different. In populated places the damage would be very noticeable if not eventually catastrophic as ocean issues compound real fast as the ecosystem is much more fluid.

That being said I imagine there would be ways to deploy this safely (ocean is big, lots of boring dead space) but I dont have trust in us to find this way.

[–] CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world 0 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

If every data centre was passively cooled in the ocean it wouldn't change temps by even 0.01 degrees. The Sun blasts an entire half of the planet with an absurd amount of energy every day. Energy, which technically originated from the sun, is just converted and being utilized to do work.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 1 points 22 minutes ago

Not the same thing. The sun doesn't concentrate the power in already hifhly populated gulfs and bays where these would be. We're not building something in the middle of Atlantic Ocean.

[–] SomeoneSomewhere@lemmy.nz 33 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

There are a number of 6-8GWe nuclear plants that dump 15+GW into the nearby sea (or in the case of Bruce, into Lake Huron). I don't see it being much of an issue. Better than virtually any other cooling option.

The issues are maintenance, energy source, and equipment supply.

[–] BevsDad@lemmy.ca 18 points 15 hours ago

The plants on the lakes so monitor the water temp so they don't affect the ecosystem during the warmer seasons still.

But I doubt the one in NB had to worry about that when more water flows by it than all the rivers in the world combined.

But yes, much better source of cooling at the cost of maintenance and equipment. Just like tidal power but with fewer moving parts.

[–] melfie@lemmy.zip 12 points 14 hours ago

Good point, although on the local scale you mention, wildlife could still be impacted. Hopefully, the overall impact on the ecosystem will be monitored and studied before expanding these data centers more broadly.