Apple Agrees to Invest $250 Million at Oregon Data Center Site

[Konrad]

Good to see Apple using renewable clean energy for their stuff. My house has 20 solar panels which completely cover my electricity usage year round. Free and zero pollution. Can it be a more obvious idea?

Hardly obvious. Solar has little to do with any green. Green would be adopting an existing vacant structure in say Detroit metro where you could walk to a grocery store, use public transportation, have schools within a walking distance and live in the greenest setting: vertically and saturated. Living in a city I drove my car 20,000 km in the last 5 years. That's green!

 

[tmarks11]

Solar has little to do with any green...Green would be adopting an existing vacant structure in say Detroit metro where you could walk to a grocery store...

And how do you think the food appears in that grocery store to cater to your needs? Green magic?

The only thing "green" about that scenario is that a significant portion of your power comes from a nuclear plant (22%). Of course, a majority of Detroit's power comes from coal (66%). Yeah, that is way better then the self-sufficient solar system that KingJosh has. Way to go.

Your food is delivered by a semi truck belching black smoke. You look out the window through the smog of street traffic, which is clogged due to the necessity of shipping in food and goods from hundreds of miles around to feed the insatiable needs of an enormous city. There is nothing Green in my book about living in an anthill of a city.

Do it if you like it, but don't try to delude yourself that this choice is somehow good for mother earth.

You want green, live on a farm, grow your own food, power your tractor with ethanol. Power your house from solar panels. Drive nowhere.

 

[FluJunkie]

And how do you think the food appears in that grocery store to cater to your needs? Green magic?

The only thing "green" about that scenario is that a significant portion of your power comes from a nuclear plant (22%). Of course, a majority of Detroit's power comes from coal (66%). Yeah, that is way better then the self-sufficient solar system that KingJosh has. Way to go.

Your food is delivered by a semi truck belching black smoke. You look out the window through the smog of street traffic, which is clogged due to the necessity of shipping in food and goods from hundreds of miles around to feed the insatiable needs of an enormous city. There is nothing Green in my book about living in an anthill of a city.

Do it if you like it, but don't try to delude yourself that this choice is somehow good for mother earth.

You want green, live on a farm, grow your own food, power your tractor with ethanol. Power your house from solar panels. Drive nowhere.

Using existing buildings rather than new construction is green.

And its been shown cities are actually staggeringly energy efficient.

 

[usptact]

The new datacenter looks like an ordinary store: parking in front of the main entry, windows, left and right wings of the building..

 

[cvaldes]

Well, what did you expect?

As a matter of fact, it makes sense. You really don't want dozens of public entry points to a non-public building. Limiting the accessibility to non-public areas reduces the security costs.

This is not a public facility. Have everyone park out front, check in with security and have cameras along the perimeter. While there may be exit-only doors along the perimeter of the building for fire code compliance, it makes zero sense to have parking lots, entry lobbies, etc. throughout the building.

 

[wwwrunaway]

Completely unfair that they are paying no property taxes. Just another example of how the rules are different for them and for us. I have employees that I pay more than the going rate. My only problem is that I do not have $80 billion in the bank.

 

[vrDrew]

Completely unfair that they are paying no property taxes.

The thing about a datacenter is that it has very few "externalities" for the rest of the community to absorb, and pay for.

It doesn't belch out smoke or emit foul odors. It doesn't discharge poisons into the rivers or groundwater. The noise of its operations isn't going to keep your kids up at night. It doesn't create a lot of truck traffic making deliveries or shipping product out. Its customers don't throw trash all over the local highways and sidewalks (try living down the block from a fast-food restaurant..) Its not the sort of place criminals are going to try robbing. And because it has to work 24/7; it doesn't even create a lot of employee traffic problems.

The jobs it provides are relatively well-paid; and most certainly aren't subject to seasonal layoffs. Building the thing will provide a much-needed boost to the local construction industry.

I know it sounds unfair, but viewed through the cold, hard eye of a municipal government - a datacenter (especially one operated by a "marquee" name like Apple or Amazon) - is about the best thing possible to have built in your town.

 

[FluJunkie]

Completely unfair that they are paying no property taxes. Just another example of how the rules are different for them and for us. I have employees that I pay more than the going rate. My only problem is that I do not have $80 billion in the bank.

How many employees?
Have you ever tried to negotiate to move your business to a small town in Oregon?
Are you willing to guarantee those employees jobs, and guarantee a funding stream for the town for 15 years?

 

[509]

My guess is some, if not all of those locations you mentioned were considered at one point by Apple, and are probably under consideration right now by other companies such as Google, Amazon, Facebook, etc.

These companies undoubtedly have a long checklist of items that they need to review:

• Where is there a good amount of land for sale suitable for development of a server farm? What is the price of the land? Potential for expansion in the future?
• Is it zoned for commercial development? If not, how difficult would it be to change the status with the local zoning committee?
• What are the property taxes on said parcel?
• What would the cost of developing the property be? How long would it take?
• What accessibility does it have to an airport (for equipment deliveries), large city (to attract qualified candidates)?
• What is the availability of renewable energy sources and the cost?
• Is the local government willing to barter concerning taxes and fees? If so, how much so?
• and so on...

No site will be optimal for everything, there would have to be some concessions made, just like any real estate transaction.

Servers are servers, routers are routers, and basically cost the same wherever they are located. The land purchase is a one time expense; however, the biggest variable ongoing expenses for a large server facility that that would be utilities and taxes.

In the end, Apple probably wittled down their potential sites to less than a half dozen and proceeded to negotiate with the local authorities/power companies on the latter two.

Somewhere, Prineville came up on top. We'll probably never know why since Apple would not discuss the details of the negotiations with other sites. By law, the public has the right to know of any special deals the local government cuts.

However if Apple struck a deal with a private power company concerning rates, that would be private matter.

You can't base Apple's projected power costs looking at a retail power bill and consumer power rates. Corporations get different rates.

Do you think Amazon.com plays UPS the same amount to ship a 1-pound package as you would pay if you walked into a UPS Store?

Yes, to all EXCEPT for property taxes. Sales tax break on construction materials ONLY.

Current RETAIL electric costs: Chelan County .027 Kw-hour, Douglas County .02 Kw-hour, Grant County .045 kw-hour.

Last time I looked wholesale costs were under 1.75cents a kilo-watt hour. It does NOT get any cheaper than that.

Surprised that Apple would select based simply on property taxes. However, Oregon property taxes are very high relative to Washington.

Maybe they just overlooked central Washington.

 

[KingJosh]

Hardly obvious. Solar has little to do with any green. Green would be adopting an existing vacant structure in say Detroit metro where you could walk to a grocery store, use public transportation, have schools within a walking distance and live in the greenest setting: vertically and saturated. Living in a city I drove my car 20,000 km in the last 5 years. That's green!

Solar hardly green? hahahahhaa have fun breathing your coal fire and paying your electricity bills.

PS, in the city 20,000km in 5 years is pretty bad lol. Bus, walk, train etc you know?

 

[usptact]

Well, what did you expect?

As a matter of fact, it makes sense. You really don't want dozens of public entry points to a non-public building. Limiting the accessibility to non-public areas reduces the security costs.

This is not a public facility. Have everyone park out front, check in with security and have cameras along the perimeter. While there may be exit-only doors along the perimeter of the building for fire code compliance, it makes zero sense to have parking lots, entry lobbies, etc. throughout the building.

I expected it to be a technical building OR with at least of a bit of creativity in outer design that we all expect from Apple. This is not a critic, just a comment take it easy.

----------

Solar hardly green? hahahahhaa have fun breathing your coal fire and paying your electricity bills.

PS, in the city 20,000km in 5 years is pretty bad lol. Bus, walk, train etc you know?

All green people forget or don't know that manufacture process of solar panels is VERY expensive due to a complicated process. You should instead ask - how green is the solar panel manufacturing process?

 

[Konrad]

I expected it to be a technical building OR with at least of a bit of creativity in outer design that we all expect from Apple. This is not a critic, just a comment take it easy.

----------



All green people forget or don't know that manufacture process of solar panels is VERY expensive due to a complicated process. You should instead ask - how green is the solar panel manufacturing process?

Precisely. Now, also consider that China is the major manufacturer of solar panels and it does not take a savant to know how green China is. Solar is still a gadget without any global impact. Many people of course were made to believe for their single family homes to be energy efficient, green, ecological, etc. after the buy some advertised trendy eco devices due to the fact that specifically in the US they generally don't know any better and fail to understand that a single family dwelling in american numbers is the ultimate anti-green setting one can come up with. Density is the most practical solution, and the oversold american dream of "we will make sure you too can afford that house" today is nothing but a curse. The continued suburbia model is helplessly fighting the global reality of high energy costs. Sure, you can pop a few panels, eat seeds, better yet, grow pot and then as previously posted drive nowhere. Drive nowhere? That's a good one. With this concept I already see about 100M households with solar panels and windmills, no cars, everyone busy in the garden. Waco? Sure enough!

 

[tmarks11]

The continued suburbia model is helplessly fighting the global reality of high energy costs.

Of course, what is really green is stacking 6 people to a room in a high rise apartment. Since everyone walks, make the alleys between apartments really narrow so no one can drive anywhere.

Who knew that the third world country living situation was not actually deplorable, but was such a lovely idea. So green!

Precisely. Now, also consider that China is the major manufacturer of solar panels and it does not take a savant to know how green China is. Solar is still a gadget without any global impact. !

Just because something is built in China, doesn't mean it can't be green... their population density in large cities, by your definition, after all...

They have demonstrated repeatedly the ability to build stuff cheaply that was invented elsewhere (solar cells invented in USA, btw).

I would agree (sadly) that solar panels, in their current technology level, is little more then a clever parlor trick wrt large scale energy production. Good to power an individual dwelling, especially one that is far from power transmission lines, but not suitable to wide scale use. Some good applied engineering, and maybe some scientific breakthroughs could change that.

What you are missing is that most individuals who power their house almost entirely with solar panels have taken drastic steps to reduce their energy footprint to a level where it can be supported by the low level of energy possible from a solar array. Which actually makes them very green, in my book. Not sucking off the coal powered wall receptacle, as your "green" city dweller is, powering his 52" flat screen from his under insulated "recycled" dwelling.

I respect those individuals for the effort they have made in reducing consumption, but don't desire to emulate them.

 

[Konrad]

You fail to understand the very simple aspect of the environmental impact and energy consumption in low density vrs high density areas. In addition you seem to be coal obsessed for perhaps personal reasons? If you are very young, you can suggest to your teacher a school trip to visit an engineering construction company where you can ask about your concern a civil engineer, an urban planner or the people who prepare EIRs/EISs.

 

[tmarks11]

. In addition you seem to be coal obsessed for perhaps personal reasons? If you are very young, you can suggest to your teacher a school trip to visit an engineering construction company where you can ask about your concern a civil engineer, an urban planner or the people who prepare EIRs/EISs.

45 years old. Nuclear engineer by education and trade. Nice slam there. Try again.

Yes, coal obsessed. As anyone who would profess any environmental leanings.

Yes, I understand the lingo, thanks for your concern.

 

[Konrad]

45 years old. Nuclear engineer by education and trade. Nice slam there. Try again.

Yes, coal obsessed. As anyone who would profess any environmental leanings.

Yes, I understand the lingo, thanks for your concern.

Wonderful. What YOU still fail to grasp is that it is significantly more energy efficient to run 300 households in a high rise than 300 single family homes regardless of the power source. Add transportation impact for the said families and your nuclear power plant will have an immediate surplus. Take it from a civil transportation engineer who is a decade older than you.

 

[tmarks11]

What YOU still fail to grasp.... Take it from a civil transportation engineer who is a decade older than you.

no, I understand the difference. But the sacrifice of embracing urban living outweighs the dubious advantages. YMMV, obviously. Big city life isn't for everyone.

Civil Transportation Engineer, as in an ASCE type?

It is hard to tell, sometimes, what someone means when the say they are Engineers. I have run into a number of network administrators with strictly IT backgrounds who believe that they are Systems Engineers.

Obviously, we both have agendas based upon our background and experience. I just like to throw out the "coal is bad nuclear is green" argument for amusement whenever I see someone trying to promulgate a "environmental friendly" solution. An amusing hobby that is lost on those of different career backgrounds.