Apple Highlights Video Detailing Environmental Friendliness of Campus 2 Project

[mbrannon47]

Direct link to MP4 for download

http://images.apple.com/media/us/en...ment-apple-campus2-cc-us-20140421_848x480.mp4

 

[mrsir2009]

I don't really understand bio-fuels... I mean, a bus burning bio-diesel instead of regular diesel is still burning something (and therefore releasing emissions). And since the bio-diesel is made from things like corn, wouldn't that just be using crops that could be used to feed people & animals to power vehicles? Can someone explain this, because I can't really see the benefits

 

[groovyd]

will be interesting to see if being green pays a dividend in the end if you do it right (presumably the way they are doing it is about as well as anyone could hope to do it) in saved energy, increased efficiency, and reduced material costs for optimized product form factor and packaging (lower shipping cost, etc.) plus the boost from increased consumer appreciation. It would be great to see going green as a net positive on the bottom line at the end of the day to help grease the gears of other profit thirsty companies to becoming responsible as well.

 

[justinthesommer]

I can't wait for this campus! It is so legit looking and everything about it screams amazing. The new infinite loop will turn heads for years to come.

 

[blco02]

My thoughts, You are being trollish. Nothing about biofuels mentioned in teh article. But I will take your bait and point out that the article dings CORN ETHANOL, not all biofuels.
Of course we have based our biofuel efforts on corn in the US because it is already a gigantic part of agriculture. But there are better less intensive sources of biofuel. Hemp, sugar beet, sugar cane and many others are easier to farm without multiple sprayings of insecticide and herbicide. And most of the alternatives do not need the intensive farming that corn does.
Every pass of the tractor or flight of the cropduster burns gas so you want to use biofuel sources that you pretty much scatter and grow, not ones that need handholding the whole way.

Biofuel buses were mentioned in the article. Read again.

 

[JohnPhamlore]

What public transit at the new location?

Public transit? What public transit near the new location? Neither Caltrans nor light rail goes anywhere close to the area. The small cities along the peninsula can't even agree on dedicated bus lanes on El Camino Real.

I'm curious how 15,000 people are supposed to get into and out of the site day in day out. The exit from 280 to Lawrence is already bad enough at times during the day.

 

[jimthing]

Exactly. This is a simple video made to get quick ideas across to an audience with no architectural or technical background in the building industries.

Norman Foster has led the way in high-tech architecture since the mid-century and has always continued to rethink his approaches. Always on the forefront of using technology to help building performance and functionality for both use and sustainability. Implementing both active and passive (and traditional) sustainable measures in synergy results in a much high performance overall.

Foster's firm is often looked at as a large, corporate architecture firm. However, VERY similar to Apple, it started in his own home office with a handful of people who had a vision of achieving a harmonious balance of aesthetic and performance using, no, creating the latest innovations in their respective fields.

There was a reason Norman Foster was picked to design the Apple campus. He and his team are among the best equipped in the profession today for this specific task.

Indeed. He is not alone either: Norman Foster, Richard Rogers, Terry Farrell, Nicholas Grimshaw, and Michael & Patty Hopkins.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03vgz7r (great 3-part programme, should one get a chance to see it.)
http://www.architecture.com/Explore/The-Brits-Who-Built-The-Modern-World.aspx

Funny how they are all Sirs or Lords now.

EDIT: BTW, Apple's Campus 2 is mentioned in episode 3 at 00:53:50, if anyone's interested (I checked my video archive as I was sure it got a mention somewhere, and there it was near the end of ep 3! ;-)

 

[Ganesha]

Biofuel buses were mentioned in the article. Read again.

Buses that run on biofuel generally run on biodiesel which in the US mostly comes from soybean oil. This is different than the cellulosic sourced bioethanol mentioned in the article. The two biofuels are as different as vodka and partially hydrogenated vegetable oil.

Corn is already a terrible source for oil/starch/sugar based biofuels it's not surprising that a waste product of corn is even worse. If we were just funding best choice for biofuels based on science we wouldn't be messing with cellulose derived ethanol from corn but the special interested run the show in DC and they know the science comprehension in DC is very very low.

 

[tentales]

jaded much ?

Some of you cynics and jaded jabberwockies need some serious cathartic treatment.

Sure, the whole world is going to hell, but can't you for once applaud the positive efforts the few big corporations are trying to make in improving their environmental footprint ?

Camp2 is a fantastic architectural statement and probably the best green building tech has to offer to date. Yes, it's a drop on a hot stone, but at least some are trying and doing their part.

In the end, overpopulation, over-consumption, over-everything is going to kill us all, in the meantime let's do away with the negative contrarian smart-ass statements and encourage what is clearly a step in the right direction.

 

[kristofferson]

Campus 2 Project

A couple of points for clarity........

Firstly, Norman Foster, the figurehead of the NFGroup, I understand, has for some considerable time, had little to no input (other than interference) in their commissioned projects.

Secondly, the New Apple Campus is actually a miniature Hadron Collider. Quite cheap at $5 Billion eh?

 

[SchneiderMan]

Extraordinary.

 

[mrxak]

Good for them. I don't about others, but I would like to still have an inhabitable planet in 100 years.

Our species only adapts to change when it actually happens. We only got smart and started using lots of tools because the environment changed in Africa and we had to adapt. Putting off a global environmental collapse just puts off the science and technology to repair the damage and remake the world as we wish it to be. Conserving things like oil just puts off the science and technology of better energy sources. Learning how to fix our planet is how we're going to learn how to terraform other planets, but we haven't screwed up our planet badly enough to force us to develop those solutions. In 100 years, I hope we have more than one inhabitable planet. If Greenpeace has its way, we'll never get off Earth .

 

[JAT]

Taking the lead? No. It's not the worlds first Eco-sensitive building. Sorry. Apple may feel Eco-conscience but building LEED certified buildings these days is a political must these days. I doubt Apple would have gotten zoning if it wasn't.

Do you listen to yourself? "political must"?? I'd rather shoot everyone involved. How about people do things that are a good idea instead of a "political must"!

 

[Tanegashima]

Please, just don't add green peace to this. They are extortion bullies masked as "Eco-activists".

Doesn't matter that they say that apple got 100% or not, it's just strategy. They make that statement so companies will want to be linked to the standards apple has, and green peace does that as long as they pay for it.

 

[gopnick]

Do you disagree with his premise?

Example: Apple is estimated to have spent $5 Billion on campus 2.

Common sense dictates that if this money was spent on researching more energy efficient assembly techniques, or sourcing more renewable materials, or developing more power-conscious devices it would have a better net impact on our environment than building a $5Billion building with a few bikes and "drought-resistant plants" would.

Exactly.

----------

It reminds me of the idiots that turn everything about alternative energy into a political argument, as if investing in battery technology is a bad thing. It’s call R&D, and yes, there are setbacks, but that’s how you move forward.

Get real will you. This is a good thing and you are putting it down.

You're putting words in my mo... on my keyboard.

1. Just like you, I hate it when people make a political argument out of anything remotely eco-friendly. I get mad at my own family members for cutting down Tesla, for instance, because of a political agenda.
2. It isn't R&D when you invest in something knowing there is no ROI. It's R&D when you invest in something knowing it will save money or make money.
3. My larger point is that Apple should spend its time truly innovating instead of kissing Greenpeace's butt. That said, I understand why they're doing it, and I'd do the same thing if I were CEO of Apple. Lip service to environmental groups is a cost of doing business.
4. The real positive change will come from innovative new technologies that also save the company on manufacturing costs, disposal costs, etc., and use materials that are more easily renewable or recyclable, and therefore cheaper for Apple to acquire (again, producing larger margins). Technology is going to drive cleaner water and air - not Greenpeace activism or guilt trips.

 

[jakefloyd]

A couple of points for clarity........

Firstly, Norman Foster, the figurehead of the NFGroup, I understand, has for some considerable time, had little to no input (other than interference) in their commissioned projects.

Secondly, the New Apple Campus is actually a miniature Hadron Collider. Quite cheap at $5 Billion eh?

The firm is still a leader in high-tech and functional architecture.

It's just interesting to see people bash an industry who have no idea what goes into the process. There are so many players, so many levers being pushed and pulled from every angle. If this project way entirely in the hands of the architect, it would have been much different.

But this is the creation of a handful of the BEST and MOST EXPERIENCED players in technology and engineering, yet people have an opinions like "this building is a waste of money because that glass will be hard to clean," etc.

You know, I am sure that Foster's team, who have collectively worked on thousands of built projects in the past 60 years, threw out what they thought would be best practices to deliberately make poor decisions..

 

[polterbyte]

I entirely agree that all those other companies should do something but I buy Apple and so have a special interest in what Apple does (which is why we're all on this apple forum)

Also I suspect that there are more chances of Apple actually doing something about it and perhaps by setting an example those other companies might be more inclined to follow

Apple has lead in everything else so it is my hope they'd lead in this

OK, I agree that Apple should deal with this, and as an industry leader, I agree that they should lead the industry in dealing with this.

But panning Apple for something that is not an exclusively Apple-related-problem — as plenty of examples show — tends to create a distortion in perception, and people start looking at [INSERT INDUSTRY RELATED PROBLEM HERE] as something only Apple should deal with. Heck, the only visible logo in the short film is Apple's, and that is not fair at all.

But this being an Apple forum or not, when you pan Apple, you contribute to the distortion in perception. And I repeat: that's not fair at all.

 

[jimthing]

The firm is still a leader in high-tech and functional architecture.

It's just interesting to see people bash an industry who have no idea what goes into the process. There are so many players, so many levers being pushed and pulled from every angle. If this project way entirely in the hands of the architect, it would have been much different.

But this is the creation of a handful of the BEST and MOST EXPERIENCED players in technology and engineering, yet people have an opinions like "this building is a waste of money because that glass will be hard to clean," etc.

You know, I am sure that Foster's team, who have collectively worked on thousands of built projects in the past 60 years, threw out what they thought would be best practices to deliberately make poor decisions..

Pretty much. This tends to happen when people hear about the costs of buildings, without knowing how they're either financed accordingly, or the project's principal aims – usually lead by a team that involves both the architect (as a company, and not just one man; i.e. Foster, in this case) AND the client.

I read a while ago on another site's forum similar statements about one of Zaha Hadid's projects. I guess architecture seems to have this mind-altering effect on many people's perceptions on the realities of real world decision making.

 

[jakefloyd]

Pretty much. This tends to happen when people hear about the costs of buildings, without knowing how they're either financed accordingly, or the project's principal aims – usually lead by a team that involves both the architect (as a company, and not just one man; i.e. Foster, in this case) AND the client.

Yes, and in the case of a project of this magnitude, quite a few other energy, engineering, building systems, productivity, and technology consultants.