Photo by Nico Baum

Amazon, ruthless, mean spirited, soulless and wedded to the obscene profit margin, is also in the business of habitual deception. When it comes to the use of water for its thirsty data centres, this is most telling. In its aggressive push towards artificial intelligence, more are set for construction. When one considers that, in 2021 alone, US data centres were found to be consuming approximately 415,000 acre-feet of water, the statistics are bound to be staggering.

Unlike its competitors, the tech behemoth is rather cagey on how much water is used by its data centres. Statistics on absolute water consumption are simply never provided. There is some speculation that water usage may be relatively less in some instances, given the company’s focus on using evaporative cooling systems which only turn on when temperatures reach unacceptable levels.

Will Hewes, who steers the water sustainability efforts for the company at Amazon Web Services (AWS), gives the impression that using water is a lesser evil, as it “reduces the amount of energy that we use”, which assists the company meet “other sustainability goals.” In an interview with Grist in August 2024, he explains that the company “could always decide not to use water for cooling, but we want to, a lot, because of those energy and efficiency benefits.” To this apparent nod to environmental decency, Hewes goes on to remark that “big portions of our data center footprint are in places that aren’t super hot, that aren’t in super water stressed regions.” Virginia and Ohio are mentioned as places where the need to use water cooling is only pressing during the hot periods of summer.

Hewes was giving a barely good impression of verisimilitude. As with Microsoft and Google, Amazon is eagerly constructing data centres in a more systematic, global way, invariably focusing on areas of high aridity. Three data centres, for instance, are proposed for Aragon in northern Spain, all to accompany existing Amazon data centres. These will be licensed to use 755,720 cubic metres of water annually, an amount sufficient to irrigate over 200 hectares (500 acres) of corn, a staple of the region. According to SourceMaterial, the water usage promises to be even greater, as that figure fails to consider “water used in generating electricity to power the new installations”.

A stark, consistent tendency is evident in the company’s practices: They are trustworthy on the subject of water consumption. Take, for instance, the glossy optimism of its November 2022 “Water Positive” initiative, intended to apply, not to the company’s entire operations, but to AWS. The intention is to return more water to communities than is used by the company in AWS global operations by 2030, and direct operations in all Amazon facilities in India by 2027. Last month, AWS announced that it had reached 53% of its Water Positive goal.

One month prior to the launch of the initiative, a strategic memo titled “AWS Water Positive Public Launch” circulated within the company. It was never intended for public consumption, but recently, both The Guardian and SourceMaterial, managed to gain access to it. The authors of the document are mindful that any increase in the company’s projected water use would be detrimental to image and reputation. It was therefore more prudent to avoid making reference to secondary water use, as it “would double the size and budget” for the campaign while not “addressing meaningful operational, regulatory or reputational risks”. The authors further added that there was “no focus from customers or media” on water used for electricity consumption.

The plan by the company was to make water efficiency savings through cutting its 7.7-billion-gallon primary consumption to 4.9 billion by 2030, all the while failing to address the thorny issue of secondary use. Secondary data would only be released if demanded by regulators. “We may decide to release water volumes in the future,” the authors propose, but doing so would be “a one-way door and we should only do so if the lack of data undermines the programme or is required by regulators.”

Those behind the strategy document were not ignorant about the consequences of rationing the accuracy on water consumption. There was “reputational risk of publicly committing to a goal for only a portion of Amazon’s direct water footprint.” Certain potential press headlines were floated: “Amazon hides its water consumption behind AWS” and “Amazon disappoints, failing to take full responsibility for water” were two suggestions.

Already attuned to the implications of this snag, Amazon spokeswoman Margaret Callahan suggested that the document was only of historical interest. It was “obsolete” and, in any case “completely misrepresents Amazon’s current water usage strategy”. The models referenced in the memo “were preliminary and unvetted.” In a marketplace of rampant dishonesty, she also thought it good to point out that other companies were just as culpable for not counting secondary water use in their figures. (Standards are low in this field.) Focusing on the direct water footprint when implementing “corporate water positive programs” was “in line with industry best practices to ensure we’re making the most concentrated impact possible”.

As for accuracy or conclusiveness in such documents, best not count on them. “A document’s existence doesn’t guarantee its accuracy or finality,” stated Callahan with postmodern vacuity. Over the course of meetings, documents were often reshaped, or flawed findings or claims exposed. Much in keeping with the conduct of governments, Amazon operates with Machiavellian glee in an environment peopled by technological princelings and ill-deserving brats. Its practices are not merely draining much-needed water supplies but creating a system of sinister opacity and impunity.

The post Draining Practices: Amazon, Water Consumption and Data Centers appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

From CounterPunch.org via this RSS feed