Translation: they won't let us build datcenters on land because we screw things up too much there. And we can't afford space. So we'll do it at sea where we can run all the gas turbines we want and wreck the Earth from there.
TL;DR: Pangeos was a concept for a floating free city that trended a few years back, but was never built for obvious reasons, just like how these floating data centres will never be built. Presumably some people were bilked into paying money to the Pangeos scammers, just like there will be those who "invest" in this.
The problem is that it costs a lot more to put a nuclear reactor into a permanently sea-worthy form-factor than it does to build on land and put up with some pesky taxes. There are plenty of places with lax regulations (environmental and otherwise) that will be happy to let you build whatever size data centre you want if you're willing to build the power generation too.
Proliferation resistant reactors should probably be used.
Like.... LFTR
Basically, the normal operation of the reactor doesn't allow the production of weapons-useful nuclear isotopes.
You'll probably also need a smaller footprint reactor
Like.... LFTR
And you'll want something that can be turned on, shut off, and has natural anti-meltdown abilities in case hurricanes or other disasters threaten the ractor
LFTRs make readily-available (liquid-form) weapons-grade Uranium-233 during protactinium separation. They're the least proliferation resistant reactor known to man.
LFTR has a far larger core than a PWR. Neutron diffusion length in water is 5 cm. In LFTR graphite moderator it's 16.
Many reactors including modern SMR LWRs can cool themselves passively without backup power. Especially when floating in seawater.
I'm no expert on U enrichment, but if there's even just a little U-232 that mixes in with the U-233 then the gamma rays get pretty hard to handle? I guess the breeding process might produce a lot of pure U-233, but again to the point of the quora response... not a lot of U-233 was used in "real" weapons.
I've never heard of MSRs being "large". The ORNL one fit in a closet, but that wasn't a breeder from thorium AFAIK. The penetration doesn't matter much if you have a blanket of Thorium to intercept neutrons.
So Much land. Even non civilized lands, Even near sea for piping water.
What does this idea solve? Or just adds problems like, Non secure assets/nucclear on the sea.
I ran the numbers for this about six months ago and it works out a lot better than all the other alternatives.
The fact you're surrounded by coolant, can use intrinsically safe versions of high pressure reactors and have low latency between multiple markets with one datacenter is a big plus.
That you're not competing with humans for electricity or water is another.
That said you'd want to build a semi submersible platform with the nuclear reactors in the pontoons and the superstructure able to house container based datacenter units. The only place with enough experience to build these is South Korea which isn't a deal breaker per se, but Samsung can pretty much eat your lunch if these get successful.
Write up an ai generated biz plan, shop it around quick. make the necessary human pyramid, get it on the stock market. it'll be as irresistible as peanut butter & chocolate. (ai+nuclear.. with a dollop of cheaper than spacex AI buildout). Doesn't matter than solar+batteries might be a BIT safer. (even goat Elon has said we don't need nuclear as we already have a free one that is at a safe distance)
Guys, guys, guys... so hear me out - remember last month when we were all giddy about datacenters in space? Well, apparently investors weren't too keen on that idea so we've come up with something much better: Nuclear datacenters at sea!
Now this is truly a visionary proposition that will certainly become another unicorn and have no issues whatsoever.
How do they deal with saltwater corrosion, do the barges go in drydocks after a couple of years? What about weather do they have their own propulsion do they need to be towed to avoid bad weather? Can't you put the same gear in containers next to the shore and avoid the whole weather issue?
Wasn't there a Microsoft idea to build data centres in shipping containers a few years ago, again using the ocean for cooling?
What happened to that?
Given the expense of the latest AI chips, or just the RAM for them, the price of land, cooling and power is not top of the expenses bill, so all talk of sea-based or space-based data centres has to be regarded as having jumped the shark.
As of yet I have not seen the use of server racks as structural architectural features. They always seem to need a vast shed that has its own supports, when server racks could also be the walls and supports for much of the building, or some other structure, maybe a road bridge.
What about (extreme) weather? The nice pictures looks like being in open sea, and there big storms may have an expensive impact if not everything is taken into account.
34 comments
[ 0.26 ms ] story [ 51.6 ms ] threadBring on the exploding drone boats.
[1] https://sealandgov.org/
https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/pangeos-terayacht-turtle/
TL;DR: Pangeos was a concept for a floating free city that trended a few years back, but was never built for obvious reasons, just like how these floating data centres will never be built. Presumably some people were bilked into paying money to the Pangeos scammers, just like there will be those who "invest" in this.
The problem is that it costs a lot more to put a nuclear reactor into a permanently sea-worthy form-factor than it does to build on land and put up with some pesky taxes. There are plenty of places with lax regulations (environmental and otherwise) that will be happy to let you build whatever size data centre you want if you're willing to build the power generation too.
Have these guys factored in the cost of a task force of protective missile frigates, subs, and destroyers at each site?
Like.... LFTR
Basically, the normal operation of the reactor doesn't allow the production of weapons-useful nuclear isotopes.
You'll probably also need a smaller footprint reactor
Like.... LFTR
And you'll want something that can be turned on, shut off, and has natural anti-meltdown abilities in case hurricanes or other disasters threaten the ractor
Like ... LFTR
LFTR has a far larger core than a PWR. Neutron diffusion length in water is 5 cm. In LFTR graphite moderator it's 16.
Many reactors including modern SMR LWRs can cool themselves passively without backup power. Especially when floating in seawater.
Highly recommend doing PWRs for this application.
Disclaimer: I'm trying to do this with PWRs.
https://www.quora.com/Why-do-so-many-people-claim-thorium-br...
I'm no expert on U enrichment, but if there's even just a little U-232 that mixes in with the U-233 then the gamma rays get pretty hard to handle? I guess the breeding process might produce a lot of pure U-233, but again to the point of the quora response... not a lot of U-233 was used in "real" weapons.
I've never heard of MSRs being "large". The ORNL one fit in a closet, but that wasn't a breeder from thorium AFAIK. The penetration doesn't matter much if you have a blanket of Thorium to intercept neutrons.
I’d be stunned if anyone takes this seriously
The sensible way would be to use the waste heat for district heating, but let's heat the fish instead
The fact you're surrounded by coolant, can use intrinsically safe versions of high pressure reactors and have low latency between multiple markets with one datacenter is a big plus.
That you're not competing with humans for electricity or water is another.
That said you'd want to build a semi submersible platform with the nuclear reactors in the pontoons and the superstructure able to house container based datacenter units. The only place with enough experience to build these is South Korea which isn't a deal breaker per se, but Samsung can pretty much eat your lunch if these get successful.
Guys, guys, guys... so hear me out - remember last month when we were all giddy about datacenters in space? Well, apparently investors weren't too keen on that idea so we've come up with something much better: Nuclear datacenters at sea!
Now this is truly a visionary proposition that will certainly become another unicorn and have no issues whatsoever.
What happened to that?
Given the expense of the latest AI chips, or just the RAM for them, the price of land, cooling and power is not top of the expenses bill, so all talk of sea-based or space-based data centres has to be regarded as having jumped the shark.
As of yet I have not seen the use of server racks as structural architectural features. They always seem to need a vast shed that has its own supports, when server racks could also be the walls and supports for much of the building, or some other structure, maybe a road bridge.
Since most people live near a coast this could power more than just data centers.