Apple to Open Massive $850M Solar Farm in Monterey, California

[flyinmac]

And a lot of people who have flashed the EFI have likely wrecked their machines in the process. It's a hit and miss sort of thing.

Obviously we're having a discussion above your knowledge level.

Nothing has to be done that puts the computer at risk. It's safer than updating iOS from 8.1.2 to 8.1.3. Updating iOS has a greater chance of rendering a machine useless.

Getting around the EFI issue is extremely minor and could easily be fully implemented in Apple's installer or even just a few lines of code in the boot loader.

 

[afsnyder]

So no tech company should do anything with solar because they'd be copying Apple?

If anything, they should be copying this.

 

[Arcady]

Tim wants to do the right thing? How about paying corporate taxes?

 

[Michael Goff]

Obviously we're having a discussion above your knowledge level.

Nothing has to be done that puts the computer at risk. It's safer than updating iOS from 8.1.2 to 8.1.3. Updating iOS has a greater chance of rendering a machine useless.

Getting around the EFI issue is extremely minor and could easily be fully implemented in Apple's installer or even just a few lines of code in the boot loader.

So all those people who have those wonderful boot crashes and kernel panics are making it up?

 

[tennisproha]

The solar farm is an $850 million project, which Cook says Apple is doing "because it's right to do."

read: "because we ****ing can!"

Seriously though, i'm glad apple's investing wisely but they have more money than… well, everyone. The amount of cash on hand they have to burn is just ridiculous!

----------

Note: I'm not familiar with this exact area -- I'm from TX, but I am currently Seattle based.

What would be virtually an impossible endeavor, though a brilliant one, given the opportunities this amount of financial backing could achieve, is to design this as a wildfire 'break'.

I know there is (I'm assuming) logic in energy conservation due to geometries of the plan (for example, 2x20 parcel of land versus 5x8). However, these solar farms are essentially clearings in the landscape. In the future it would be interesting if these "solar breaks" (shall we call them) acted as a means to prevent the further spread of potential wild fires ... the clearing in the brush!

Again, I'm not familiar at all with the geography ... and I'm only associating CA with an overly general assumption of location and wildfires. In any case, seeing pictures of vast fields of PV panels had me thinking of different geometries that could be used for additional functionality.

This is Apple. Think about the integrated antennas/structure of the iPhone 4. Yes, there were initial issues, but the initial concept of 1+1=3 is refreshing compared to a lot of 1:1 concepts that have the ability to do more!

_MM

Interesting thought. It would essentially create a permanent escape fire. You should try to reach out to apple and convey the idea.

 

[ahlsn]

As a lifelong apple user and shareholder, the "right thing" for Apple to do is make the best products on earth and make money doing it. When does this $850M project break even and start to be a smart investment for the shareholders?

At the moment they announced it. Since me and many others care about this stuff and wouldn't buy Apple products if they took no responsibility.

 

[kds1]

Based on the town listed in the First Solar press release (Cholame, CA) this is not in "foggy Monterey" the city, but rather the extreme southeast of Monterey county, which is pretty much in the Central Valley:

Google maps link

No, that would not be the Central Valley, that would be the Salinas Valley. Are you from or have you lived in California?

 

[Mac Fly (film)]

Strange. Why foggy Monterey? Why not cheaper, sunnier, Central Valley?

Because foggy Monterey revives more ultraviolet energy than you might think. Cloudy or foggy does not mean solar isn't a good idea.

Saw Musk saying recently the UK gets 80 - 90% of the solar energy the sun provides to sunny countries, the trick here is because that bright point in the sky is missing you assume solar is a bad idea. And that's with current solar tech which is just 20% efficient. What about when solar cells are 60 efficient? Imagine a future when solar roof tiles are incredibly efficient and relatively inexpensive and provide you with more energy than your homes needs in winter. That day cannot come soon enough.

 

[Rufuss Sewell]

Tim wants to do the right thing? How about paying corporate taxes?

Tim follows the law. He does not write tax law.

 

[thekev]

Nice! So that is when it break's even, huh? Interesting. Well, I hate to break it to you but we still have some semblance of a free capatilist market in this country (albeit it's evaporating fast) so the company has no control over who buys, sells, shorts or options it's shares. If it want's that control, it can buy back all it's shares and go private.

You know how buyouts work right? Buybacks don't actually mean that Apple gains partial autonomy, although giving you the benefit of the doubt, it could have been an unfortunate choice of words. That being said, these guys are extremely good at PR. It's unlikely that they would make such an investment it if it didn't make financial sense.

 

[inscrewtable]

I'd love to see Apple do something really innovative and useful like invest in a liquid-fluoride thorium reactor it is just a matter of investment. Once you get over the shock one realises that this is the real 'green' solution to power for the future.

 

[Morgenland]

Reply to the "shareholder"

As a lifelong apple user and shareholder, the "right thing" for Apple to do is make the best products on earth and make money doing it. When does this $850M project break even and start to be a smart investment for the shareholders?

Boy, I am also shareholder. And I am proud that Apple may occasionally break out of the economic Banker game. This and this alone proves how much Apple is.

 

[H2SO4]

So all those people who have those wonderful boot crashes and kernel panics are making it up?

Ok, let’s clear this one up and go on with the thread;
1. There is no flashing of any EFI involved. I don’t believe there is any re-writing of any boot ROMs that reside on any critical hardware items.
2. Kernel panics and boot crashes are almost always due to people not following the instructions correctly. (They are not hard). Usually the problems arise at the start of the related threads whilst the code is being debugged and put together.
3. Most people should have a backup, it’s sensible. The thread is primarily for Mac Pros which mean multiple drives. All you need to test is a HDD of 20GB or more. eBay Uk would see you with one for about £6. That’s not a huge outlay.
What these people suffering crashed should have done is bought one of these drives and installed it on there and tested, those that use a production machine are let’s say, less sensible.
4. All you need is a capable graphics card and you’re set, you can even use an unflashed PC one.

I can tell you from personal experience that once you put some work in to understand it you’re golden.
There is probably one file to replace in the System folder and two plists to modify, after that you can boot Yosemite. One of those files is the PlatformSupport.plist and if you have a look at yours which is located in /System/Library/CoreServices and you will see entries like below, (this is Apple making the installer check if your machine is what they 'consider to be supported', not the hardware flaking out);
<string>Mac-4B7AC7E43945597E</string>
<string>Mac-F22C89C8</string>
<string>Mac-F22587A1</string>
<string>Mac-942459F5819B171B</string>
<string>Mac-F42388C8</string>
<string>Mac-F223BEC8</string>
<string>Mac-F4238CC8</string>
<string>Mac-F222BEC8</string>
<string>Mac-4BC72D62AD45599E</string>
<string>Mac-F2208EC8</string>
<string>Mac-66F35F19FE2A0D05</string>
<string>Mac-F4238BC8</string>
<string>Mac-189A3D4F975D5FFC</string>
Basically if your Mac is on the list you have a green light. This is similar to Siri not working on the iPhone4, ie an artificial limitation set by the powers in Cupertino. The worst thing about it is that at one time even Apple had it working. IIRC the first Dev Preview of Mountain Lion did natively support the early Mac Pro. Apple removed it for the later betas.

Michael, have a look at the threads before posting back.

 

[lowendlinux]

Good job Apple (Mr. Cook) now use some of that charm and convince others to follow suit.

 

[2457282]

I have been a long time supporter of solar and applaud Apple for their continued effort of using renewable energy to power thier company. My only concern is that theses solar farms means clearing the land of all trees and plants. I wish there was a way to install such a large solar farm while preserving a bio-diverse environment.

 

[TallManNY]

130 mW/h equal 130 000 kW/h. (130 000 * 0.08$) * 24 hours, 249 600$ of free energy per day. 91 104 000$ per years. Repay itself in 10 years

You are probably right about it paying for itself in 10 years, but your math is wrong because solar projects don't produce peak energy 24 hours a day.

Also, the $850 million "investment" is not an upfront cost, so you re confused about the boggy you are chasing. It is probably the expected total payments by Apple over 20 years under the power purchase agreement.

 

[Michael Goff]

Ok, let’s clear this one up and go on with the thread;
1. There is no flashing of any EFI involved. I don’t believe there is any re-writing of any boot ROMs that reside on any critical hardware items.
2. Kernel panics and boot crashes are almost always due to people not following the instructions correctly. (They are not hard). Usually the problems arise at the start of the related threads whilst the code is being debugged and put together.
3. Most people should have a backup, it’s sensible. The thread is primarily for Mac Pros which mean multiple drives. All you need to test is a HDD of 20GB or more. eBay Uk would see you with one for about £6. That’s not a huge outlay.
What these people suffering crashed should have done is bought one of these drives and installed it on there and tested, those that use a production machine are let’s say, less sensible.
4. All you need is a capable graphics card and you’re set, you can even use an unflashed PC one.

I can tell you from personal experience that once you put some work in to understand it you’re golden.
There is probably one file to replace in the System folder and two plists to modify, after that you can boot Yosemite. One of those files is the PlatformSupport.plist and if you have a look at yours which is located in /System/Library/CoreServices and you will see entries like below, (this is Apple making the installer check if your machine is what they 'consider to be supported', not the hardware flaking out);
<string>Mac-4B7AC7E43945597E</string>
<string>Mac-F22C89C8</string>
<string>Mac-F22587A1</string>
<string>Mac-942459F5819B171B</string>
<string>Mac-F42388C8</string>
<string>Mac-F223BEC8</string>
<string>Mac-F4238CC8</string>
<string>Mac-F222BEC8</string>
<string>Mac-4BC72D62AD45599E</string>
<string>Mac-F2208EC8</string>
<string>Mac-66F35F19FE2A0D05</string>
<string>Mac-F4238BC8</string>
<string>Mac-189A3D4F975D5FFC</string>
Basically if your Mac is on the list you have a green light. This is similar to Siri not working on the iPhone4, ie an artificial limitation set by the powers in Cupertino. The worst thing about it is that at one time even Apple had it working. IIRC the first Dev Preview of Mountain Lion did natively support the early Mac Pro. Apple removed it for the later betas.

Michael, have a look at the threads before posting back.

After looking over that thread, and not the Yosemite one, I sure do have egg on my face. Somehow my brain interpreted the line in the other thread of "load this boot.efi" as flashing. So embarrassing.

 

[Mr. Retrofire]

Redmond, Please Start Your Photocopiers

Apple copied Microsoft, regarding renewable energy:

In 2005 and 2008:
“Microsoft's main U.S. campus received a silver certification from the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) program in 2008, and it installed over 2,000 solar panels on top of its buildings in its Silicon Valley campus, generating approximately 15 percent of the total energy needed by the facilities in April 2005.”

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft#Environment

November 8th, 2013
Microsoft Signs Twenty Year Wind Power Agreement in Texas

 

[TallManNY]

Press Release

I thought I might help explain what the deal probably is, so it makes more sense.

This is from First Solar's Press Release:

TEMPE, Ariz.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- First Solar, Inc. (Nasdaq: FSLR) today announced that Apple has committed $848 million for clean energy from First Solar's California Flats Solar Project in Monterey County, Calif. Apple will receive electricity from 130 megawatts (MW)AC of the solar project under a 25-year power purchase agreement (PPA), the largest agreement in the industry to provide clean energy to a commercial end user.


Apple's commitment is to buy energy for 25-years under the power purchase agreement. The $848 million commitment is the expected payments under that PPA over the 25 years based on the amount of energy the 130 MW solar plant is expected to generate. It isn't Apple writing a $848 million check to First Solar on day one.

The electricity may be sold to Apple cheaper than the electricity that it would normally buy from its Utility (which I believe is PG&E, which is also buying the electricity from the other half of the solar project). More importantly for Apple though is that the PPA will fix the price of electricity for the next 25 years (it might be escalating each year, but if it is it is probably on some fixed rate (e.g., 3% per year). That gives some nice certainty to a big company like Apple. One of their costs of operation in California just became very predictable for the next 25 years. Think how easy that makes some planning.

Also, for those that care, assuming this plant is finished before the end of 2016, it will qualify for a tax credit equal to 30% of the the cost of development and construction. I don't know what it will cost to build a solar project this size, but let's guess that the tax credit is $70 million. I doubt it could be more than $100 million. But I don't really know. Maybe it is. Anyway tax credit decreases to 10% in 2017, so you have to get in now if you want to take advantage.

Considering Apple's profits it could use that tax credit, but in the normal course of a PPA, the credit would go to First Solar and its investors. The interesting thing is it could be structured for that credit to come to Apple (the 25-year term of the PPA, which is 5-years longer than most PPAs, is one clue to me that they might have done so.) If Apple is getting the tax credit (let's guess it is $70 million), then I'm almost certain that this is a very nice deal. In year one they might pay $40 million for the delivered electricity but receive a $70 million tax credit.

There are other ways this deal could be structured, with only about a sentence to go on I'm just guessing. But the above analysis would be pretty normal. (Side note, yes I'm involved in the energy industry and even worked for First Solar as a consultant several years ago for a short period of time.)

 

[GPerry]

Who Owns First Solar?

The Waltons. Read on:
A new study by the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR) finds that the Waltons are funding nearly two dozen anti-solar groups — such as the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and Americans for Prosperity, which are waging state and national fights to roll back clean energy policies — while a Walton-owned energy company is pushing for regulations that hinder the growth of rooftop solar power. Rooftop solar has been cited as a tremendous opportunity to accelerate the transition to renewable power, save money for homeowners, and create tens of thousands of new jobs, but, as the report details, the Waltons’ interventions and spending are a very real threat to this future.[37]

Last year, ILSR found that since Walmart launched its environmental campaign in 2005, the company’s self-reported greenhouse gas emissions have grown by 14 percent. Instead of investing in efforts to reduce carbon pollution, Walmart continues to support lawmakers who deny global warming. ILSR’s 2013 report finds that both Walmart’s and the Walton family’s political donations heavily favor lawmakers who voted to keep subsidies for oil companies and prevent the EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions. [38]

“In June 2013, Walton-owned First Solar sent shock waves through the solar industry when its CEO, James Hughes, published an op-ed in the Arizona Republic endorsing a proposal by the state’s biggest utility to impose a new fee on households with rooftop solar. Averaging about $50 to $100 a month, the proposed fee would be large enough to completely destroy the economics of household energy production, halting the spread of residential rooftop solar in Arizona. As the rest of the solar industry closed ranks and joined with environmental and consumer groups in opposing the plan, First Solar backed the utility, insisting that it was right to maximize its financial position. Bryan Miller, a vice president at Sunrun and president of the Alliance for Solar Choice, put First Solar’s actions in perspective: “No solar company has publicly advocated against solar until First Solar.”[39]

 

[AGSP]

Solar what?

You know all the chemicals and stuff that goes to make all those panels, which at best run at 18% efficiency, what was the cost to the environment making them?

Just wondered!

 

[H2SO4]

After looking over that thread, and not the Yosemite one, I sure do have egg on my face. Somehow my brain interpreted the line in the other thread of "load this boot.efi" as flashing. So embarrassing.

Not at all. I think you’ll find any sane person will respect you all the more for the reply you just gave.

 

[smirking]

Strange. Why foggy Monterey? Why not cheaper, sunnier, Central Valley?

I was thinking the same thing, but it turns out that they got it wrong in the article. This is in Monterey County, not Monterey, CA. Monterey County is hugamamongous and much of it is largely empty. The project site is as close to Fresno as it is to Monterey.

So yeah, it actually is going to be in Central California.

 

[smirking]

No, that would not be the Central Valley, that would be the Salinas Valley. Are you from or have you lived in California?

This is so far south and east that it's pretty close to hopping into the Central Valley. I don't think even most people in California could easily tell you if that spot is Salinas Valley or Central Valley without consulting a map. At that point, who cares what valley it is. It's pretty empty and and it's not very hospitable.

 

[Michaelgtrusa]

Apple investing in a liquid-fluoride thorium reactor would be a leap forward.