Could Cloud Servers Heat Homes In The Future?
Now that the space shuttle program has flown its last mission*, the only things left skyrocketing in America are fuel prices and the number of companies hopping on the cloud services bandwagon. Some forward thinking engineers at Microsoft have proposed a radical new system that taps into the disadvantages of both of those issues, and hey! it's a Green one, too. Rather than stuffing OPEC's pockets to heat our homes in the winter, why not turn to the heat generated by all those cloud servers?
Microsoft's research paper on the subject is titled "The Data Furnace: Heating Up with Cloud Computing." At the moment, it doesn't sound very feasible; Microsoft admits that the temperature exuded by servers doesn't get hot enough for long-range transport, so its solution is to replace the heating unit in a home with a "micro-datacenter" of between 40 and 400 computers. It's suggested that using data furnaces, server farms could offer "free heat" to people who agree to host micro-datacenters in their home. The report says cloud operators and home owners alike could see significant cost savings from such a setup. Server farms often require robust cooling systems that wouldn't be need in the data furnace scheme.
*On a totally unrelated note, did you see they're looking to crash the International Space Station into the Pacific in 2020?
Image credit: amaronline.com
Comments
Comments are closed on this article
![]()
schneider1492
July 31, 2011 at 1:29pm
you link to other future us. inc sites all the time, but this is the first time i saw you link to the competition (PCmag.com).
![]()
ShyLinuxGuy
July 28, 2011 at 2:33am
I could envision the problems already with putting servers in people's homes to heat them. It can get bumped (and damaged) over a frenzied game of ping-pong or while some Joe is trying to get the canoes out. It can get wet if the garage/basement floods. It can get stolen--homes don't have the same safeguards as a datacenter (ADT doesn't count). It can be burned up in a fire--houses catch fire *much* more often than commercial buildings. Not to mention, the homeowner may be tempted and may successfully hack the server. And don't forget, the homeowner might live in an area where blackouts and spikes are very common, and the UPS systems can't always save the day...can you think of anything else?
Any company implementing this will be facing exorbitant levels of downtime, for one reason or another, *and* expense to repair or replace these in-home datacenters. Not to mention, the HO's privacy is completely violated because support personnel will need to get frequent access to these servers, right? And, what about liability? HO insurance isn't going to be too willing to cover upwards $10,000 of equipment the HO doesn't own, so either the HO will be held liable or the company will quickly drain their profits fixing and replacing these in-home datacenters.
Peace out, I'm getting tired, but I stumbled across this and had to comment =P
![]()
schneider1492
July 31, 2011 at 1:42pm
the equipment owner would no doubt have there own equipment insured. I'm sure the installation location would be secure (meaning locked up, with possibilities for access from outside the home). also i don't think there just servers, they would be designed to pump heat through the house, and vent excess. the bigger problem i see is running that much bandwidth to a private residence.
![]()
DustDiesel
July 27, 2011 at 8:02pm
I think this could work in an apartment or hotel situation in a very cold location. Make a couple floors server rooms and then pump the cold in from outside to cool the fronts and the warm into a heat distrobution for the rest of the building.
![]()
praetor_alpha
July 27, 2011 at 2:43pm
How much hell are AT&T, Comcast, Time Warner, etc... going to raise about having to build out fat pipes to remote locations? Probably not going to happen in Canada, as a terabyte up there is worth a first born kid.
Guess Verizon and Google won't be able to string fiber fast enough.
![]()
schneider1492
July 31, 2011 at 11:36pm
when a company has a industrial internet connection put in (ie a server building), they usually have to pay for installation. the isp's would probably be head over heals in love with the idea because the infrastructure would be expanding at no cost to them. on top of that localized redundant servers (clones, mirrors, whatever you want to call them) can actually reduce the stress on existing infrastructure epically during peak times. the same thing goes for the power grid as well if your servers are spread out across the country there is less chance of many of them being knocked out at one time, and they don't have to run a massive amount of power to one location.
![]()
yammerpickle2
July 27, 2011 at 1:40pm
If they provide the hardware, the heating/cooling equipment, paid the electricity, and let me use their internet connection I would gladly give them half the square footage of my house. Sign me up. I wonder what my ping and download speeds would be!
![]()
zeroibis
July 27, 2011 at 12:59pm
I already have this, been running on computer heat for years. Just throw a few OCed i7 systems on with a bunch of crts and plasma screens and you got pleanty of heat! The problem is the summer, here is GA it can get into the upper 80s with ac running 24/7 with all the vents in the house closed except the one going to the computer room.
![]()
Brad Chacos
July 27, 2011 at 12:21pm
Ha! A very fine question that I didn't even think of! I'd have to assume that, theoretically of course, the server owners would pony up the cash. Otherwise, that $500 electric bill would cancel out the free heat very quickly.
![]()
JohnP
July 27, 2011 at 11:55am
My HTPC in my bedroom is a good heater for the wintertime. During the summer, I have the A/C running but in the winter with the door closed, it throws off the thermostat that is in my room so the rest of the floor gets cold. Not such a great idea...
![]()
FrancesTheMute
July 27, 2011 at 11:29am
That's fine for the wintertime in cold climates. But what about in the summer when you don't want all the extra heat?
Also, I would gladly host a small data center in my home for the heating benefits IF I could also have my home internet connection tie into the line the data center is using!
![]()
TerribleToaster
July 27, 2011 at 1:08pm
It's a pretty simple matter to use heat to cool a building with little added machinery and power (i.e. absorption refrigeration, it's the same way some cars cool using the engine heat for AC, would be perfect). It really depends on how much heat they can give me to show you how much I can do with it. But if they think they can heat your house with a micro-data center, I can guarantee I can cool it.
Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook
Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.















