Data Centers Turn to Aviation Engines for Power Solutions
1d 7h ago by piefed.social/u/ExtremeDullard in fuck_ai from spectrum.ieee.org
Repurposed aviation engines power AI data centers, bridging energy gaps and enabling rapid AI infrastructure growth with efficient, low-emission solutions.
That's right: the slop revolution is powered by A-1 jet fuel. What a glorious way to waste dwindling fossil energy resources...
They’re converted to use gas. They take the place of regular industrial gas turbines because they’re more compact and lighter, and can be used later for backup energy after the centres are connected to the grid. So as much as I dislike AI and its relentless impact on power and the environment, misinformation on what fuel these engines are running on isn’t helpful. Also, all the info is available in the article you posted OP.
Isn’t the rotation of the turbine in a jet engine designed with the idea of pushing massive amounts of air and not necessarily the efficiency of the turbine rotation to produce electricity? Like it feels it’s not that efficient and they’re just reaching for anything they can use to generate power.
Nah, just take the turbofan off and replace it with a generator.
Yes, that’s the how. But I was talking about efficiency. Would that engine be just as efficient as another motor connected to a generator to produce electricity? My hypothesis was: no it’s not, which is why I was saying they’re just reaching for anything to provide power at this rate.
I worked at a turbine manufacturer. The parts are similar but a grounded turbine is not much different in shape to one on a plane. Everything around it is different. Plane turbines sacrifice environmental protection over efficiency... They are more fuel efficient than power plant turbines. But they are more polluting since there's no way to capture and treat the exhaust.
Thank you. That’s more of the differentiation I was curious about. I know fundamentally a turbine is a turbine but I figured there was some degree of customization and trade offs between the two.
And the more polluting is gonna be a fun one especially with how bad the issue of generators at the Grok DC in Tennessee is.
The other differences are mostly in materials used. You want to use light weight materials for aircraft engines. Often they require more maintenance because it may be hardened aluminum like 7075 which is great for strength and light weight, but may eventually fail from vibration fatigue where fractures propagate as more back and forth bending cycles happen.
Using turbines is like the fking most common way to generate electricity ever, damn this people, they are as dumb as the chatbox they're creating.
Like what, they will build a combined cycle power plant? one of the most common ever? and a administrator or whoever writes this bullshit, saw a power plant for the first time in their lives, and saw a turbine and went "Oh lOOOOOKKKKKKKKKk IS a turbine, like on planes that go whoosh wooosh trough the sky".
edt: i read it and is just using turbines made for aviation, for energy instead, still quite dumb, but not as much.
Using turbines is like the fking most common way to generate electricity ever,
Except for solar, it's the only way.
And I swear solar is just photons spinning some tiny turbine and pushing electrons around. I know that's wrong, but I'm believing it anyway.
For a while, some solar power systems did just boil water and spin a turbine as , by having mirrors that lasered a tower of molten salt. It's only really recently that photovoltaics have become cheap enough to replace them.
Leaded gas too I hope
These are gas turbines, so they typically run kerosene of some description, leaded fuel is actually bad news as far as maintenance goes.
Leaded fuel is for piston engines.