Oregon City Drops Fight To Keep Google Water Use Private 74
An anonymous reader quotes a report from the Associated Press: Residents of The Dalles, Oregon, are learning how much of their water Google's data centers have been using to cool the computers inside the cavernous buildings -- information that previously was deemed a trade secret. A lawsuit by the city on behalf of Google -- against Oregon's biggest newspaper, The Oregonian/OregonLive -- that sought to keep the water-use information confidential was dropped, the newspaper reported Thursday. City officials abandoned the 13-month legal fight and committed to release the company's water consumption in future years.
In an email, Google confirmed Thursday that its water use numbers would no longer be a trade secret. "It is one example of the importance of transparency, which we are aiming to increase ... which includes site-level water usage numbers for all our U.S. data center sites, including The Dalles," Google spokesperson Devon Smiley said. Google says (PDF) its data centers in the Oregon town consumed 274.5 million gallons (1 billion liters) of water last year. In a Nov. 21 blog posting, Google said that all of its global data centers consumed approximately 4.3 billion gallons (16.3 billion liters) of water in 2021, which it said is comparable to the water needed to irrigate and maintain 29 golf courses in the southwest U.S. each year. The Dalles Mayor Richard Mays said Google had previously insisted its water usage was a trade secret because the company was concerned about competitors knowing how it cools its servers, but then changed its position and agreed to release the water records. "That's why we backed off (the lawsuit)," Mays told The Oregonian/OregonLive.
The Oregonian/OregonLive, which had requested Google's records last year, said the case represents a major test of Oregon public records law. "This seemed to be a perfect example of a clash of two important storylines, both the expansion of big businesses and the public resource that they need to use," Therese Bottomly, editor of The Oregonian/OregonLive, was quoted as saying.
In an email, Google confirmed Thursday that its water use numbers would no longer be a trade secret. "It is one example of the importance of transparency, which we are aiming to increase ... which includes site-level water usage numbers for all our U.S. data center sites, including The Dalles," Google spokesperson Devon Smiley said. Google says (PDF) its data centers in the Oregon town consumed 274.5 million gallons (1 billion liters) of water last year. In a Nov. 21 blog posting, Google said that all of its global data centers consumed approximately 4.3 billion gallons (16.3 billion liters) of water in 2021, which it said is comparable to the water needed to irrigate and maintain 29 golf courses in the southwest U.S. each year. The Dalles Mayor Richard Mays said Google had previously insisted its water usage was a trade secret because the company was concerned about competitors knowing how it cools its servers, but then changed its position and agreed to release the water records. "That's why we backed off (the lawsuit)," Mays told The Oregonian/OregonLive.
The Oregonian/OregonLive, which had requested Google's records last year, said the case represents a major test of Oregon public records law. "This seemed to be a perfect example of a clash of two important storylines, both the expansion of big businesses and the public resource that they need to use," Therese Bottomly, editor of The Oregonian/OregonLive, was quoted as saying.
An Oregon City, not the Oregon City (Score:3)
As an aside, "Oregon City" and "The Dalles" (including the) are both great examples of how bad Oregon is at naming cities.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought The Dalles was in the The Texas.
Re: (Score:3)
There is also the town Dallas OR, totally separate from The Dalles just to further illustrate the OP’s point.
Re: (Score:2)
Who's on first?
Keith Moon?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
As an Oregon resident adjacent to Oregon City (an actual city) this headline was a bit confusing.
Yo, dawg...
Re: (Score:1)
Translation (Score:5, Insightful)
"It is one example of the importance of transparency, which we are aiming to increase ... which includes site-level water usage numbers for all our U.S. data center sites, including The Dalles,"
"Once it became clear that we were fighting a losing battle, and are not, in fact, entitled to conceal our usage of public resources, we have concluded that transparency is an important value that we wholly embrace. You're welcome."
Re: Translation (Score:1, Troll)
Now that's privilege for you... (Score:4, Insightful)
They are in principle as entitled as you are to conceal your usage.
Why am I entitled to keep my water usage concealed?
But even if I was, then how about "...because they are using a significant fraction of the town's water, and it's often not as renewable a resource as you might want to think. The same way that if one subdivision was using significantly more water that would be something the public should know about and be able to address.
But the original premise... that individuals have some sort of entitlement to keeping their water usage private, that's not a thing. Undisclosed usage of a shared, limited resource is not a right. And hiding behind "trade secret" in order to avoid bad optics is particularly egregious.
Re: (Score:3)
They are in principle as entitled as you are to conceal your usage.
It's a public utility. It's subject to sunshine laws. So, I guess I agree with you on this point.
Re: (Score:2)
They are in principle as entitled as you are to conceal your usage.
I'm sorry, why should they be entitled to conceal their usage at all.
They negotiated an agreement with the city. That agreement should be public. End of story.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Translation (Score:4, Insightful)
My town had been keeping some public utility water use statistics non-public as well, until it came out that they were selling water for agricultural use at rates far below what residential users were being charged, undercutting the local county's agricultural water service, and effectively having the town's residential users subsidizing the agricultural users. Oops.
Once it became public they had to increase the rate for the agricultural users, which was helpful at reducing some pending price hikes for the residential users that had been going to be necessary to pay for water processing upgrades.
Re: Translation (Score:1)
Re: Translation (Score:2)
I assume itâ(TM)s because both chillers and ponds involve significant evaporation.
Re: (Score:1)
Why are they using any water? Why canÃ(TM)t it flow in a loop, either to a cooling pond or a chiller?
Why can't it? You tell us. That is exactly what they do.
In this instance their closed loop system is cooled by water pumped from a river.
Because the river water is filtered before pumped, and afterwards returned to the river, this counts as "used water" by the states legal definition.
All of the irrigation systems that use that same rivers water still get to use it.
The river isn't and never was used for drinking water as far as I am aware.
So how much water google uses has no effects on any home receiving wa
Re: (Score:2)
It is best for all of us if we just take corporations at their word. Should we question their benevolence, it may anger them, and they may withhold their blessings from our harvests.
Take heed, non-believers! Thy Gods will not be made to suffer your mortal meddling!
Re: (Score:2)
My guess, because it is almost always the answer, is that it's cheaper that way.
golf courses is a standard unit? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Your 42 million Americans figured out to be 6.5 gallons/person, so your math is way off.
At 1000gal/month per American it comes back to 22,800 people for a year, so congrads on being 3 orders of magnitude off and not noticing your answer had something wrong with it.
Re: (Score:2)
At 1000gal/month per American
1000 gal/month is about right for people who live in apartments or townhouses. For single-family homes, the rate is about 3000 gal/month per person, mostly for landscape irrigation.
Additionally, Americans indirectly consume 30,000 gal/month through the products they buy, especially food and energy.
So Google's water consumption of 274 million gallons would supply about 700 typical American families.
So basically negligible.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know how you do that. My lowest month last year was 4,000 gallons, when I wasn't watering. The highest was 12,000.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ah you caught me, I drill out flow restrictors in faucets, it annoys me when I can't get the flow I need!
Also, I have a swimming pool, which needs to be topped off a few inches once a week or so. That's only a fraction of what it takes to water the lawn.
Leaks would quickly be evident in Texas, as the plumbing is in the attic!
Re: (Score:2)
I gave up watering my lawn because I realized it just means I have to mow it.
Re: (Score:2)
Here in Texas, we have these things called HOAs - homeowners' associations - that can sue you and even take away your property, if you don't keep your lawn watered and mowed. And to make things worse, they plant all the lawns with St. Augustine grass, which is great in that it controls weeds all on its own, and thrives in heat and sun. But on the other hand, it is a very thirsty grass, needing a lot of water. At least water here is plentiful.
Re: (Score:2)
We have those here, I didn't make the mistake of buying a property under one.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I specifically chose an HOA property because I don't want an independence-minded neighbor next door who refuses to keep up their lawn or parks junkers out front. That affects the value of MY property. So by all means, please stay in your unrestricted property, and I'll stay in my HOA!
Re: (Score:2)
My lowest month last year was 4,000 gallons
4,000 gal/mo is a lot.
Perhaps you have a leaky toilet. Or several.
Put a drop of food coloring in the bowl before you go to bed. If the water is clear in the morning, you need a new flapper and/or valve.
Re: (Score:2)
The toilets are good, I'd notice if they were running. But I do have a pool, which has to be topped off a few inches about once a week. That's a lot less than watering the lawn, but still could account for the 4,000 gallons.
Re: (Score:2)
The toilets are good, I'd notice if they were running. But I do have a pool, which has to be topped off a few inches about once a week. That's a lot less than watering the lawn, but still could account for the 4,000 gallons.
That pool and the constant topping-up that it needs, even if it is only once a week that you "top up", can consume that water.
You might also want to observe your yard watering schedule, if it is on a timer.
You might also have a faulty water meter, but getting your local water folks to check it & fix it might take some doing.
Re: (Score:2)
i live alone in a house, do not irrigate. my utility measures by 100 cubic feet = 1 unit. 100 cubic feet of water equals 748 gallons. Most months my utility charges me 0 units, and never more than 1. last time i got charged a unit was August. not targeting you, but collectively we need to get over the lawn thing
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, already checked the pool for leaks. When water is leaking, it doesn't just disappear, it will surface somewhere. Fixed the worst, the rest will have to wait for a remodel in a year or two. In the Houston area, there is no water shortage and isn't likely to ever be one because of the relatively wet climate. Still, no need to waste water.
Re: (Score:2)
I live in a house, and consume nowhere near that.
I also consume way less than 3000 gal/mo, but my yard is xeriscaped. I use drip irrigation on my fruit trees, but that's it for outdoor water use.
Most of my neighbors have big expanses of green grass that they water every day, often with plenty of water draining into the gutter.
Many of them also have pools.
3000 gal/mo is an average.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
the pond/waterfall "feature" it had was consuming about 300 gallons/day in evaporation/leakage.
One lesson I have learned in life is to never, ever, ever include a water feature in your landscaping.
You will always regret it.
Re: golf courses is a standard unit? (Score:3)
I recommend gallium. It looks neat, and the low (for a metal) freezing point lets you easily switch to a frozen "water"fall for a festive winter appearance.
Keep it away from aluminum though.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I can't believe you actually thought that just 29 golf course used the same as 10% of the entire US population. Really? You didn't think to double-check that calculation?
Well lets see... 29 courses * 9 holes * 9 holes * 200km/hole = 469800km^2
The US is ~10 million km^2 so that's about 5% of the land area of the US so it makes sense they'd use about 10% the water.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just in... Google Announces (Score:4, Funny)
Google Announces that they have a new method of treating and reusing their cooling water, they will pilot the program at the massive complex at The Dalles Oregon.
Local residents downstream of The Dalles on the Columbia River heralded the news as good since they're drinking water will no longer taste like a tin can, hair loss among men and women will decrease by 80% and their children won't grow extra limbs, and eyes!
Re:Just in... Google Announces (Score:5, Informative)
FYI, The Dalles is on the Columbia river, which is not exactly drying up. Drinking water downstream (Portland) comes from the Bull Run watershed, which is basically melt water off the greater Mt. Hood area, not from the river.
Just the same, we deserve to know how the natural resources are being used in our local area.
Re: (Score:1)
Can anyone explain? (Score:2)
Re:Can anyone explain? (Score:4, Informative)
To be clear, I know nothing about this particular installation.
Re: (Score:3)
Haha, golf courses (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What really matters for blue collars and no collars is golf courses.
To help improve the internet for everyone please increase your screen font size for maximum visibility and use a permanent marker to strike out the comparisons below you consider not relatable to blue- and no-collars. The amount of water consumed by Google’s data center could be used to:
- produce 61,000,000 gallons of Californian almond milk
- refine 150 metric tons of deuterium
- supply a private zoo of ten tigers for 3,600 years
- fill 500,000,000 pairs of those platform shoes with fish inside them
- di
Global Warming (Score:1)
Turn off you Cell Pixels.
People are going to Drown.
You just Don't Understand
Oh My, How can I sleep tonight or EVER AGAIN?
Not a trade secret (Score:3)
It has nothing to do with being how it cools its servers. I'm sure that information is available. It's most likely embarrassing to someone, either Google or the City. It also means that people can work out how much Google is paying for said water and will show how much the city bent over for them.
Trade Secrets are a wonderful catch-all.
Google Water? (Score:2)
Is this like Google Maps, with only rivers, lakes and oceans present?
Nitpicking: Title is a bit confusing (Score:2)
Oregon City is one place, The Dalles, another.
Could someone change the title to âoeA City in Oregonâ etc. etc?
I had to do a double take reading this, Iâ(TM)d had no idea Google had a presence in Oregon City.
The Dalles = 1 German acquarium (Score:1)
If golf courses aren't a convenient unit of measure, you could say that Google's data center in The Dalles uses enough water in a year to fill 1 now-broken fish tank and have a little left over for maintenance.
This has nothing to do with trade secrets (Score:1)
sweatshirts (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
person to help you with moving, (Score:1)
locksmith (Score:1)
dental laboratory supplier (Score:1)