Apple Strikes Deal for Third Solar Farm at North Carolina Data Center

[ChrisA]

You don't have to be in Iceland, or any place with geothermal activity. Of course being closer to these places makes it more efficient, but like I said it can be placed virtually anywhere.

OK. I want to build one. I only need 20KW. I live in So. California what would a system look like and what would it cost to install? What are the major parts and how long to they last.

Assuming that power cost in $0.21/KWH how long is the payback at current interest rates.

Until you can answer those questions NO ONE will listen to your suggestions that it is better then Solar. Seriously if you numbers are good I'll go with it.

 

[bigchrisfgb]

OK. I want to build one. I only need 20KW. I live in So. California what would a system look like and what would it cost to install? What are the major parts and how long to they last.

Assuming that power cost in $0.21/KWH how long is the payback at current interest rates.

Until you can answer those questions NO ONE will listen to your suggestions that it is better then Solar. Seriously if you numbers are good I'll go with it.

How am I supposed to know the exact numbers in a specific location? You want the actual numbers then ask your local supplier. Here is a typical example showing that geothermal energy paying back it costs in less than half that of solar with significantly higher annual savings.

http://www.geothermalgenius.org/blog/solar-vs-geothermal

Also note that this is based on heating and cooling use of geothermal energy, it is possible to include a system that creates power. Also what you have to remember is that solar often requires a south facing roof or area for the solar panels to be attached too, things like tree coverage etc can get in the way. Geothermal can be placed anywhere.

 

[darkplanets]

... You know... It boggles my mind why they waste so much money on this stuff and don't invest in liquid fluoride thorium reactor technology instead. They certainly have the resources to take on bureaucracy and to make this a public issue... I mean, if they really care about green energy...

Considering half the public can't even draw fission products, let alone tell you that Thorium is an element, I doubt we'll ever get commercial MSRs in this lifetime. Nuclear has forever been equated with scary, because what's unknown is scary to the ignorant.

I always wondered about the cost/benefit ratios for solar panels. Do their total costs (unsubsidized) make them net losses, or loss-leaders? Manufacturing and disposal certainly aren't environmentally friendly.

Part of me wants to see a complete carbon cycle -- if we can get bacteria to fix CO2 and make burnable biofuel...

 

[ACAC]

Is Solar Energy the right choice?

After reading all the interesting comments, I come to realize that Apple had chosen a solution that is easiest to install and cheapest to maintain, replace or upgrade.

Wind is great but high initial cost (tall metal structure with a huge motor & long blades on top), and maintenance is a high cost, in hiring technicians and in safety (changing huge heavy metal gears high above ground in a constantly windy environment), and the issue of birds are flying into it. And bats, who eat millions of insects every night, whose sonic radars were interfered by those huge blades.

If turbine on land is costly, you can imagine the new technology of turbines at sea. Not only costly to build and maintain but could be damaged or even lost at sea in hurricanes or earthquakes.

Nuclear is contradicting to the philosophy of those yuppy Californians. In light of numerous accidents around the world, whether human errors, design errors or earthquakes, it would be a publicity nightmare for Apple in decades to come if there is a single accident in an Apple reactor. The only people who favor nuclear are probably those who will be financially benefited from it, directly or indirectly.

Geothermal is low cost installation and low cost maintenance but it is for adding heat, not removing heat.

 

[Martin81]

If turbine on land is costly, you can imagine the new technology of turbines at sea. Not only costly to build and maintain but could be damaged or even lost at sea in hurricanes or earthquakes.

And a solar farm will survive a hurricane / tornado? What about damage from hail? And in wintertime: What about frost or snow?

 

[GeneralChang]

How am I supposed to know the exact numbers in a specific location? You want the actual numbers then ask your local supplier. Here is a typical example showing that geothermal energy paying back it costs in less than half that of solar with significantly higher annual savings.

http://www.geothermalgenius.org/blog/solar-vs-geothermal

Also note that this is based on heating and cooling use of geothermal energy, it is possible to include a system that creates power. Also what you have to remember is that solar often requires a south facing roof or area for the solar panels to be attached too, things like tree coverage etc can get in the way. Geothermal can be placed anywhere.

If you do a bit of research, you’ll realize that a system designed for heating/cooling does not translate to a system that can produce electricity. Using a geothermal gradient of a few meters below ground, you could concievably produce something like a watt-hour of electricity, assuming you live in an area where it is quite cold above ground all the time (if it’s ever warmer above ground than it is below, you’d need some way to reverse your system to take advantage of a reversed gradient).

That’s about enough to power a 40-watt incandescent bulb. In addition, this system would not be able to heat and cool your home because controlling the temperature inside a building using a ground based heat-sink and generating electricity using the heat of the mantle aren’t even remotely the same thing.

Go figure.

 

[Z400Racer37]

Considering half the public can't even draw fission products, let alone tell you that Thorium is an element, I doubt we'll ever get commercial MSRs in this lifetime. Nuclear has forever been equated with scary, because what's unknown is scary to the ignorant.

I always wondered about the cost/benefit ratios for solar panels. Do their total costs (unsubsidized) make them net losses, or loss-leaders? Manufacturing and disposal certainly aren't environmentally friendly.

Part of me wants to see a complete carbon cycle -- if we can get bacteria to fix CO2 and make burnable biofuel...

Yeah, that's the beauty of innovation though. All it takes is one great idea and some capital to fund a proof of concept, build up production, and install an adequate infrastructure and change the world. The encroachment of under-informed, and in many cases downright ignorant opinions on the ability of geniuses to bring their innovations into being is a pretty disgusting result of unrestrained democracy...

I've actually heard the idea of what if we had carbon neutral fuels? That is to say, imagine if our energy source was as abundant and cheap as the energy produced by MSRs, which would allow us to manufacture the amount of hydrocarbons we consume daily, thus creating a neutral hydrocarbon emission environment...

I can't even begin to imagine how far we have been set back by the ability of individuals to inhibit the product of other people's minds.

 

[JHankwitz]

Why the focus on solar energy? How about wind turbines?
Current onshore wind turbines can reach 7.5-8 MW per turbine. Why not combine these two elements? They should have enough space on these solar farms to mix both technologies.

Wind turbines are less cost effective than solar. Mechanical wear and tear results in high maintenance and replacement costs not to mention the initial cost of construction.