Amazon AI Data Centers To Double as Carbon Capture Machines (semafor.com)
- Reference: 0175587099
- News link: https://slashdot.org/story/24/12/03/1635220/amazon-ai-data-centers-to-double-as-carbon-capture-machines
- Source link: https://www.semafor.com/article/12/01/2024/amazon-ai-data-centers-to-double-as-carbon-capture-machines
> Amazon Web Services is partnering with startup Orbital Materials, which used artificial intelligence to create a new material specifically designed for separating carbon from hot air exhaust in data centers, the companies announced Monday.
>
> Orbital Materials CEO Jonathan Godwin said he expects AWS to capture enough carbon to exceed the fossil fuel consumption used to power its AI data centers, giving them a net negative impact on climate change. The process will cost less than purchasing captured carbon to offset its climate impact, according to Godwin. The system, part of a pilot program at a to-be-determined data center location, works when outside air is sucked in and used to cool extremely hot semiconductors designed to run or train powerful AI models, such as Anthropic's Claude chatbot.
[1] https://www.semafor.com/article/12/01/2024/amazon-ai-data-centers-to-double-as-carbon-capture-machines
Here's a tip (Score:4, Insightful)
Anyone discussing a carbon capture "technology" is selling you something.
It's not that we don't need to do it at some point, it's that every single proposal is a joke in terms of both scale and cost-effectiveness compared to reducing fossil fuel use in the first place.
This is supposed to make people feel better about their electric bills going up due to increased electric demand from worthless slop-centric data centers that draw gigawatts.
Re: (Score:3)
> This is supposed to make people feel better about their electric bills going up due to increased electric demand from worthless slop-centric data centers that draw gigawatts.
It's more likely something their bought-and-paid-for local politicians can tell voters about after they green light a data center that nobody wants in their back yard.
"Look, it's good for the environment!". Meanwhile their diesel generators run every time the weather gets too warm or too cold.
Re: (Score:2)
> Anyone discussing a carbon capture "technology" is selling you something.
Presumably they are selling "technology" in terms of a new technical development. I honestly don't understand what your complaint here is. The word is used throughout most of industry. Simple catalyst manufacturers will sell you "technology" that does exactly what they say it will. Yeah people sell you stuff. News at nine.
Addresses the "Air Movement" cost (Score:2)
One of the issues identified in applying carbon capture is the cost of air movement. The data centers are already paying for moving air. See: Getting real about capturing carbon from the air (https://www.cell.com/one-earth/abstract/S2590-3322(24)00421-4) But there is something very off in the scale factors here. It does not seem plausible that they are going to move enough air to "capture enough carbon to exceed the fossil fuel consumption used to power its AI data centers".
Re: (Score:2)
I suppose the datacenters are already powered mostly by renewables.
Expectations (Score:3)
> Orbital Materials CEO Jonathan Godwin said he expects AWS to capture enough carbon to exceed the fossil fuel consumption used to power its AI data centers, giving them a net negative impact on climate change.
And I fully expect a harem of supermodels to service me tonight. I wonder if Mr. Godwin has the same degree of confidence in his expectations as I do.
Lacking in Specifics (Score:4, Interesting)
Wow, there is quite a bit missing here. The article describes their magic dust absorbing the carbon dioxide, and then simply says the carbon is stored underground. No mention of whether the magic dust goes underground, necessitating the purchase of more, or whether it's put through another process (that presumably doesn't cost energy) to pull the carbon out, to be sent underground using yet another process that doesn't cost energy. Good thing they used AI - there are more problems to be solved here than just the creation of magic dust.
Lot to unpack here. (Score:2)
> Orbital Materials CEO Jonathan Godwin said he expects AWS to capture enough carbon to exceed the fossil fuel consumption used to power its AI data centers, giving them a net negative impact on climate change.
Does this also cover the carbon production of the drilling, pumping, transport, refining, transport again and all the other steps in said fossil fuels used to generate the power? Color me skeptical, but I have my doubts any of that was factored in once they reached some magical, "NET NEGATIVE" theoretical threshold.
> The process will cost less than purchasing captured carbon to offset its climate impact, according to Godwin.
Purchasing captured carbon? Purchasing captured carbon? Is that even a real thing you can do? And why would you want to when your primary motivation is using power? To stockpile the carbon for fu
Greenwashing (Score:2)
I'm sure the only use of AI was in writing the proposal.
Greenwashing at its best (Score:2)
So far, "carbon capture" has proved to be just as real and just as close as fusion powered generating plants. We'll leave the topic of the environmental effects of heat plumes on aquatic ecosystems for another day.
Does not sound very convincing... (Score:2)
Scam? Misdirection?
This is all smoke and mirrors (Score:3)
Data centers don't generate CO2 themselves, the power plants that power them do if they are Coal, Natural Gas ect. So don't put the CO2 capture on the data center for a press release, put it on the power plant. But amazon won't do this for one reason, cost.
Confusing article (Score:2)
> Cooling mechanisms are designed to pull heat away from the chips and blow the hot air out of the data center. Materials known as “sorbents” can absorb carbon dioxide as air passes over them.
I'm familiar with direct air capture systems. And I'm familiar with datacenter HVAC. This article is either confused, or is glossing over important details. Unless my reading comprehension is off, the article is suggesting that the sorbent is going to pull CO2 from the hot aisle of the datacenter, becau
which used artificial intelligence (Score:2)
> which used artificial intelligence
Of course they did, because humans are too dumb to do this themselves, right?
Re: (Score:2)
"Hot air exhaust" is also something where certain humans are at their best. Seems like a perfect job for AI, though I can think of cheaper ways to convert electricity into heat.
Re: (Score:2)
> Of course they did, because humans are too dumb to do this themselves, right?
Of course we are. Humans are too dumb for a lot of things, which is why we invent tools to help us, be that the abacus, the differential engine, or a trained neural network algorithm (as we know it AI).
Most of us are fucking useless beyond remembering the Times table and how to add two numbers together.
Re: (Score:2)
Most AI is fucking useless beyond some statistics.