CBC News Updates Article About ‘Wonder Valley’ Data Centre Complex

Two days ago, Eagle Andersen reported for CBC News that the Wonder Valley data centre complex — previously — would “release the equivalent of 23 atom bombs of heat waste” every day. This figure is quoted in the headline, and repeated in the first two paragraphs:

An analysis of the mammoth data centre proposed by celebrity investor Kevin O’Leary suggests it would release the equivalent of 23 atom bombs of heat waste into the boreal forest of northwestern Alberta every day. If the Wonder Valley project goes ahead, “‘about 23 Hiroshima-sized atomic bombs worth of energy every single day will get dumped into that landscape,” said Utah State University physicist Robert Davies.

If you are steeped in the world of data centre media coverage, you might recognize this comparison. Dan Robinson, writing for the Register in May:

A proposed mega-scale datacenter in the US state of Utah has caused controversy after a physics professor estimated that the facility and its associated power generation could dump 23 atomic bombs’ worth of energy per day. But the real question is whether it will actually ever get built.

Take a wild guess which physics professor made that estimate.

It is not a surprising repetition as the projects in Alberta and Utah are quite similar. Not only are both backed and promoted by Kevin O’Leary, they are being jointly marketed as 7.5 gigawatt twins. But a comparison to one of the most extraordinary acts of war ever committed is hardly meaningful except — as it was in this case — as a made-for-headlines quote.

The editors at CBC News clearly thought this was too much, and substantially revised the article. It now carries a more responsible headline — “Physicist warns proposed data centre would generate ‘large, if not extreme’ heat waste” — and carries an editor’s note and correction:

This story and its headline have been updated to provide further context about the preliminary nature of Robert Davies’ assessment and align with our journalistic standards and practices. An earlier version of this story also said that at full operation, the project would release around 18 gigawatts of heat a day, according to Davies. In fact, Davies said the project would consume energy at a continuous rate of 18 gigawatts, or about 1.5 petajoules per day.

The differences between the versions are remarkable. The new one contains far more caveats, including an acknowledgement from Davies that “of course, that’s not explosions”, and that the numbers in his report are “a first-order estimate intended to convey scale”.

I am curious how Davies arrived at an energy consumption figure of 18 gigawatts, though. Not only is that more than double what the project’s website claims, it is over 60% more electricity than is currently being generated in Alberta, and around 77% of the total capacity of our entire grid.

While I still doubt this project is much more than a self-promotional effort by an opportunistic and loudmouthed investor, and the environmental impact of data centres like these must be a greater priority than it currently seems to be, I am glad editors were able to put this professor’s figures in their fuller context. A comparison to a bomb is not especially helpful because the difference between heat emitted slowly and heat emitted instantly is not slight. But because the loud and pervasive marketing of A.I. boosters is something news outlets feel compelled to cover in a fair and balanced way, I understand fighting their fire with fire.