this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2023
418 points (96.2% liked)

Technology

72932 readers
3937 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
[–] ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That would be considered consumed.

[–] bhmnscmm@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Not really. At least not in the sense that it's a net loss of water downstream.

It's not like irrigation or bottling, where water is entirely removed from the system and not returned.

[–] ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It is removed from the system. It's not practically immediately recoverable. The capacity to supply that water has been spent.

[–] bhmnscmm@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

If you want to talk about water treatment capacity, then sure. Treatment capacity is used for cooling.

That's not what I'm talking about though. I'm talking about the mass of water being consumed (i.e., removed) from the watershed. The water removed from the river for cooling is returned. There is no net loss of water.