> So if you're already pumping/circulating the water from outside
»Natick datacenters consume no water for cooling or any other purpose.« (From the FAQ)
I guess if you're able to get the heat to the outer walls, then being submerged in water should take care of the cooling for you, without the need to pump in ocean water and circulate it.
Recirculating the water wouldn't be considered consuming.
They do have flat plate heat exchangers, commonly used on boats and either in direct contact with the water, or bonded to the hull, that have a closed loop cooling system to conduct the heat to the water.
But submersion of the entire vessel isn't needed for this to be effective, just sufficient surface area in contact with water to effectively disperse the heat.
There are many safer ways to do this than submersion. I will do the calculations later but I don't believe even the entire surface of the submersed data center would be sufficient to disperse the heat using natural convection and conduction. It takes 1000s of feet of submersed(or buried) tubing to effectively reject the heat in common geothermal/lake source home cooling systems, and they are typically in the 60,000 btu range(~18kw)
A submerged heat exchanger in a closed loop cooling system seems like a much better solution, if the reason for submersion is cooling related.
At 240kw of power consumption, that level of energy density must be using some sort of forced air/water cooling system.
So if you're already pumping/circulating the water from outside, what is the benefit of submersion? Why not just float it on the surface?