This reminds me of people who would pump water from a pool of some sort into a water tower at night and then release the water back to the pool through a turbine during the day.
Last edited:
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Building Solar Farm at North Carolina Data Center
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This reminds me of people who would pump water from a pool of some sort into a water tower at night and then release the water back to the pool through a turbine during the day.
There is a reason why one stores capacitance and uses transformers with the converted energy.
I have always believed that the court of public opinion can make a kangaroo court in a totalitarian regime look just. You are proof of it.
One the one hand, Apple gets slammed for being lax on environmental consciousness. Also, people say that Apple doesn't contribute anything to the US economy because they don't manufacture their stuff in the USA.
When Apple actually does something about it, people like you call it a "waste of time and land." There is nothing about the fact that Apple is taking sustainability seriously. Also, this will provide jobs to the local economy. Surveyors and engineers will be needed to survey the land and design the fixtures. Construction crews will be needed to build the fixtures and install them.
Evidently, nothing that Apple does makes a difference. It's just that people love to hate Apple.
Solar pays for itself if you have the capital. Apple has the capital.
For the data center and for the region cooling costs are greater than heating costs. So selling to the grid during the day and buying from the grid at night should work well.
I believe the reason they don't put the panels on the roof of the data center is because panels need low reflectance, and the data center needs maximum reflectance for cooling.
In a well designed solar farm the land under the panel becomes protected open space; an additional environmental advantage.
For the data center and for the region cooling costs are greater than heating costs. So selling to the grid during the day and buying from the grid at night should work well.
I believe the reason they don't put the panels on the roof of the data center is because panels need low reflectance, and the data center needs maximum reflectance for cooling.
In a well designed solar farm the land under the panel becomes protected open space; an additional environmental advantage.
This has absolutely nothing to do with Apple. I'm against fads in general. Being 'green' is a fade for people. I have problems with studies done by researchers with agendas. Science is the search of knowledge not to use a narrow view of facts to support your own beliefs.
I have a problem with dumb soccer moms driving around 3 water head kids in her prius because it's the thing to do. When taking into account what goes into making that car from the very first mineral that is dug from the ground it's less "green" then a 13MPG Jeep. The fact that each one of those kids over the, course of their lives, will have a 'carbon footprint' greater then that of a fleet of hummers running 24/7. She never thought about forgoing procreation because that directly effects her and carbon is our problem not population.
Actually if they are using enough power then the panels will pay for themselves without a subsidy. Why do you think there are so many companies that will put up panels behind the meter for credit worthy entities? Before you are going to express such a strong opinion look into the actual economics.
----------
Actually learn and quit reciting talking points. Scientific studies haven't went in both directions. Ironically enough even this Koch funded study confirms climate data: http://goo.gl/wUwj8
Last edited:
Well at least Apple is burning down the land first. I hope it stings the locals eyes for a bit. I love the green after a fire... so fresh.
I thought Apple liked things small though? Lots of land is needed (big space) for 1's and 0's. That's like hanging a huge power supply off a mini.
Green Apple or Red Poisonous Apple? I hope no animals were hurt during the making of the film... I mean... plant...s burned though?!?! Pictures of the fire please. It would make a nice visual.
I thought Apple liked things small though? Lots of land is needed (big space) for 1's and 0's. That's like hanging a huge power supply off a mini.
Green Apple or Red Poisonous Apple? I hope no animals were hurt during the making of the film... I mean... plant...s burned though?!?! Pictures of the fire please. It would make a nice visual.
It is plausible to a certain extent. Usually the way this works is that any excess power generated is put back in the grid and then you grab what you need during low output times.
The debate is not about whether global warming is happening or not, it is. The debate is about the extent of it
As a Mechanical Engineer there is only viable type of Nuclear Power and they are now calling it 4th Generation [although it was the original 1st Generation developed by the Father of Thermodynamics, Ernesto Fermi] -- Pebble Bed Nuclear.
The radioactive isotope doesn't have to be the Uranium 238. Sure, there is Thorium but the issue is the way in which Energy is extracted and contained.
Fermi recognized the concept of a Fuel Rod was asinine and served only to drive the goal of the Military to have plutonium created.
Pebble Bed encases Carbon around the Uranium in the form of uniform carbon spheres suspended in Liquid Helium and the energy differential extracted from the radiation turns the Turbine which converts it into MW of Electrical Power. One catch: It doesn't provide a mechanism for Weaponry.
But like all matters of politics and control:
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN-PBMR_postponed-1109092.html
Westinghouse postponed it along with South Africa.
Then we had the Japanese Tsunami with it's Nuclear Issues.
China woke up and is now going head long into 4th Generation Pebble Bed.
http://www.nucpros.com/content/porvair-supplies-filtration-system-chinas-4g-nuclear-reactor
So, once again we'll let China lead in Solar, Wind and Nuclear that we invented. All three are important, but if done right, even Pebble Bed Nuclear is unnecessary..
Eventually Nuclear will be replaced with Positron Energy sources that will have Space and Military Application.
The fact that it was 81 degrees in Michigan on October 8th.
the fact that it's almost November, and here the leaves are JUST starting to change color.
they call it "Global Climate Change" because Global Warming was a misnomer, in the long run global warming made the earth COLDER. hence the rename. lrn2lrn
Last edited by a moderator:
You misunderstood, i didn't say batteries are involved in solar panel implementations, but that solar panels, like batteries, are damaging to the environment.
Also, while global warming is a certainty, human effect is nowhere near as certain. Also, who is to say that a little extra CO2 wouldn't be helpful if we are heading into a little ice age.
----------
These are all facts, of course. Why do you assume it's effected by humanity?
Or, you know, we could simply stop ****ing with ****, instead of playing chicken with the earth.
becasue at the end of the day, WE ALL DEPEND on her. she, DOES NOT depend on us. she can kick us off this ride at her will.
----------
I'm hoping they will stop trying to enslave black people too. A man can dream, can't he? :')
No, technically that's wind power. And rain doesn't power windmills
I work at a utility and I have no clue what you're talking about
The guy with the -4 rating is right - no sun, no power. Batteries only last 12 hours so the data center has to be connected to the grid and powered by Duke Energy. Unless you want to lose access to your iCloud data whenever there's a storm.
What agenda? Green energy involves lowering the carbon footprint and fuel dependence, which is only marginally related to global warming. If you think they're the same thing you have no clue what you're talking about.
Apple is sitting on enough money that they can spend it on redoing the glass on their Manhattan store for whatever reason. More power to them if they want to use it to offset a % of their load with green generation.
It will mean lower prices. For Apple. For consumers, the prices will stay the same and Apple will just make a slightly larger profit. And to the true loyalist, that is what is most important.
One very distinct advantage of this "news" is it distracts peoples attention away from the other project.
Early on, Jobs came to the realization that Apple was in over it's head. Immediately he reached out to Microsoft & Amazon for help. Seeing the opportunity, both companies entered in a strategic alliance with Apple to share their expertise & success in cloud services. As a result unlike MobileMe, Apple will not fail.
Bolstered by the use of Azure & EC2, it's iCloud only in name. If only Apple could bring themselves to admit this and celebrate the success. Microsoft & Amazon are to be commended.
Early on, Jobs came to the realization that Apple was in over it's head. Immediately he reached out to Microsoft & Amazon for help. Seeing the opportunity, both companies entered in a strategic alliance with Apple to share their expertise & success in cloud services. As a result unlike MobileMe, Apple will not fail.
Bolstered by the use of Azure & EC2, it's iCloud only in name. If only Apple could bring themselves to admit this and celebrate the success. Microsoft & Amazon are to be commended.
Thats almost a guarantee. Thats pretty much how they work. Otherwise as sun comes and goes their supply would raise and fall too much.
----------
I reckon you will find when they get to filling that site with Solar Cells, they will also cover their roof of the data center.
I admire the ingenuity, but from an energy standpoint its terribly inefficient.
Its essentially using electricity to pump water through a turbine to generate electricity.
Nuclear power is the most environmentally damaging energy sources known to man. Even if you could ignore the extremely harmful process of producing the fuel rods there is no escaping the fact that there is no way to dispose of the waste. Every country, including the US, simply uses a policy of hide it and hope for the best. This invariably leads to uninhabitable areas and increased cancer rates. Not to mention, that these problems will not go away because the half life of the fuel used in nuclear plants is so long.
Also, nuclear power is horribly inefficient. All the data contrary to that point is erroneously driven by analyses that only factors in the amount of fuel, but excludes the cost of that fuel and the waste produced.
Yes, warming is what you expect coming out of an ice age...
Again, MAN MADE. Fact of life there is no such thing is normal temperature for the earth.
Fuel dependency? Since we are talking about solar we're talking about power and we CAN power ourselves for many many many generations on what we have here. So carbon footprints is only marginally related to global warming? Get a clue yourself.
Yes, they have went in both directions. Just because you choose to only acknowledged one side of it doesn't make it non-existent. Again there was nothing pointing to man made climate change in there and defiantly not to the extent that some claim. The Earth doesn't have a 'normal' temp, it never has evened out but rubber bands between warmer and cooler.
Please. By the way you sound, the only kind of scientific data (it's a joke to even call it scientific) you trust comes out of the mouths of those talking heads on Faux News, the same morons who believe the earth is only six thousand years old and that humans kept dinosaurs as pets.
No need to keep believing those Faux News and big oil talking points as they are only meant to keep people ignorant about reality. This is your wake up call, I suggest you answer it.