Amazon's Water Use Strategy Exposed: A Hidden Record Reveals a Culture of Secrecy
In a stunning revelation, leaked documents from Amazon have shed light on the company's secretive approach to its massive water use in powering its datacentres. The documents show that Amazon's cloud computing division deliberately chose not to disclose its true water consumption figures, opting for a more palatable number that does not include "secondary" uses – i.e., water used to generate electricity.
According to the leaked memo, Amazon aimed to cut its primary water usage from 7.7 billion gallons per year (roughly equivalent to 11,600 Olympic-sized swimming pools) to 4.9 billion by 2030. However, this figure only accounts for direct water use and does not include secondary uses that make up a staggering 90% of the company's total water footprint.
Critics argue that Amazon's approach is a deliberate attempt to downplay its environmental impact. "It would be better if they could own up to it," says an anonymous Amazon software developer. "Even if they said it was a low priority, at least that would be honest."
Experts agree that Amazon's selective disclosure of water use data is misleading and incomplete. "In environmental science, it is standard practice to include both primary and secondary uses to capture the true water cost of datacentres," says Shaolei Ren, associate professor of electrical and computer engineering.
Amazon's efforts to obfuscate its water footprint extend beyond its own operations. The company has funded industry-standard methodologies that create loopholes for companies like itself to avoid transparency. Nathan Wangusi, a former Amazon water sustainability manager, claims that the company's tactics are designed to "obscure" rather than reveal.
As US tech companies continue to grow and invest in AI, their massive datacentre operations will only intensify concerns about energy consumption and environmental impact. In this context, Amazon's secretive approach is particularly worrying, given its stranglehold on cloud computing and vast resources.
The leaked document raises questions about Amazon's commitment to sustainability and transparency. While the company claims it has achieved 53% of its Water Positive goal, critics argue that this figure only accounts for a small portion of its overall water use.
Ultimately, Amazon's actions suggest a broader trend in corporate environmentalism – where companies focus on superficial goals while avoiding real accountability. As consumers and regulators increasingly demand more transparency from these behemoths, it remains to be seen whether Amazon will change course or continue down the path of secrecy.
In a stunning revelation, leaked documents from Amazon have shed light on the company's secretive approach to its massive water use in powering its datacentres. The documents show that Amazon's cloud computing division deliberately chose not to disclose its true water consumption figures, opting for a more palatable number that does not include "secondary" uses – i.e., water used to generate electricity.
According to the leaked memo, Amazon aimed to cut its primary water usage from 7.7 billion gallons per year (roughly equivalent to 11,600 Olympic-sized swimming pools) to 4.9 billion by 2030. However, this figure only accounts for direct water use and does not include secondary uses that make up a staggering 90% of the company's total water footprint.
Critics argue that Amazon's approach is a deliberate attempt to downplay its environmental impact. "It would be better if they could own up to it," says an anonymous Amazon software developer. "Even if they said it was a low priority, at least that would be honest."
Experts agree that Amazon's selective disclosure of water use data is misleading and incomplete. "In environmental science, it is standard practice to include both primary and secondary uses to capture the true water cost of datacentres," says Shaolei Ren, associate professor of electrical and computer engineering.
Amazon's efforts to obfuscate its water footprint extend beyond its own operations. The company has funded industry-standard methodologies that create loopholes for companies like itself to avoid transparency. Nathan Wangusi, a former Amazon water sustainability manager, claims that the company's tactics are designed to "obscure" rather than reveal.
As US tech companies continue to grow and invest in AI, their massive datacentre operations will only intensify concerns about energy consumption and environmental impact. In this context, Amazon's secretive approach is particularly worrying, given its stranglehold on cloud computing and vast resources.
The leaked document raises questions about Amazon's commitment to sustainability and transparency. While the company claims it has achieved 53% of its Water Positive goal, critics argue that this figure only accounts for a small portion of its overall water use.
Ultimately, Amazon's actions suggest a broader trend in corporate environmentalism – where companies focus on superficial goals while avoiding real accountability. As consumers and regulators increasingly demand more transparency from these behemoths, it remains to be seen whether Amazon will change course or continue down the path of secrecy.
! Like, how can a company as massive as Amazon just ignore its water footprint like that? It's not just about them, though – we need to think about the entire ecosystem and what kind of damage they're causing. And it's so messed up that they've created loopholes for other companies to avoid transparency too 
. And then they fund industry methods that let them wiggle out of actually disclosing the truth... it's like they're playing some kind of corporate game, where transparency is just a word on their resume 
. We need to keep digging and find out more about this water use strategy before we can trust anything Amazon says again 
. it's not just about them, though - it's about setting a standard for transparency and accountability in corporate environmentalism 
I get that they want to cut their primary water usage but shouldn't we know the whole truth? 
they need to be more transparent about their environmental impact, even if it's hard to hear 
That doesn't seem right to me. I mean, they're already using up a crazy amount of water - like, 11,600 Olympic-sized swimming pools per year! 
And now they're just gonna gloss over all that secondary stuff? It's not cool, man.
I get it, they want to avoid looking bad, but shouldn't they be trying to do good instead?
the fact that they've got this whole "primary" vs "secondary" thing goin on is just laughable. who even comes up with this stuff?! and now experts are sayin they're just messin with us, creatin loopholes and obfuscatin their own impact... it's like they think we're not smart enough to figure it out ourselves! 
. It's like, if you're gonna be a big player in the game, you gotta own up to your mistakes and show that you're trying to do better 
. I'm calling out Amazon for this - they need to step up their transparency game and stop being so secretive 
.
. They're trying to hide how much water they're using just so they don't look bad? That's not right. If they can do it, we should know about their secret plan to cut down on water usage and whether it's actually going to make a difference.
. We need companies like Amazon to be transparent about their actions and make commitments to sustainability that they can actually follow through on. Until then, it's just going to keep being hard for consumers to trust big corporations with our data and money 
that no one's pointing out this obvious fact yet - Amazon's water use strategy is basically a big ol' PR stunt 
. They're trying to make themselves look like environmental heroes by only sharing half the story 
. I mean, come on, if they're gonna say 4.9 billion gallons of water per year, that's gotta include secondary uses, right? It's not like Amazon's gonna magically reduce its carbon footprint just 'cause it's trendy 
You think a little greenwashing is gonna cut it when the world's watching? It's time for these companies to step up and be real about their environmental impact 
. They're basically saying, "Hey, we'll let you in on a secret... but only if you agree not to tell anyone else 
." No thanks, Amazon 
.