Energy from solar panels is usually more expensive than buying it from the plant...
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's Data Centers Now Running on 100% Renewable Energy, Corporate Facilities at 75%
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Energy from solar panels is usually more expensive than buying it from the plant...
Imagine how amazing it would be to have this self-sufficient iDevices natively.
This is a start
Hand crank iPhone case charger
Greenpeace: "100%? That's pathetic, we expect at least 200%! What is this rubbish?"
As they cruise around in the ocean in their diesel powered ships.
And this is why Steve Jobs was called to meet with Obama. At least this is my belief. It wasn't so much about the economy or bringing business back home. But I don't want this to become a political debate. I think it's great that Apple is relying on renewable energy sources.
where are now all the Apple bashers that accused Apple of being environmental evil for building the datacenter in a state with one of the dirtiest energy sources ???
Thank you Apple for being environmental responsible.
Thank you Apple for being environmental responsible.
Last edited:
This just in, Samsung has also announced that they are green energy aware and that the are at 150% already.
The CEO of Samsung was heard saying, "We work on this for soo long. We are proud once again to make something bigger than Apple."
In response to someone asking what the time is, Samsung's CEO hit hit himself in the face with his 26" S-Watch and knocked himself out cold.
The CEO of Samsung was heard saying, "We work on this for soo long. We are proud once again to make something bigger than Apple."
In response to someone asking what the time is, Samsung's CEO hit hit himself in the face with his 26" S-Watch and knocked himself out cold.
I whole heartily agree with you. When you see a company do anything, the first thought should be, "OK so how are they benefitting from this. PR, goodwill?" For an avid apple consumer I'd say they made me feel good about owning an apple product. So now I can go and tell all my friends, coworkers how wonderful apple is to the environment...Marketing.
This is awesome if it was pure Solar/Wind. A lot of times renewables just contain other CO2 gas producers like natural gas.
I thought concentrated solar was the better way to go instead of these large expensive panels in terms of cost/efficiency. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_solar_power
I thought concentrated solar was the better way to go instead of these large expensive panels in terms of cost/efficiency. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_solar_power
The analysts will probably downgrade Apple because of this since the higher cost of green vs. coal energy cuts into profits.
Agreed, they costs a lot ...
I recently tried to do the math to figure out if it is worth for me to put solar panels on my roof. It would take me ~20 years to recover the cost (I live in PA, would be different in CA) and the estimated life time of those panels would have been ~25 years. Needless to say I figured it is not worth it, given the huge upfront cost and the long time to recover the cost. Apples main datacenter is also in a location that is probably also not getting optimal sun exposure.
But it is great to see that Apple is investing some of their cash into this great project.
So....without knowing where to find more detail....if any one or combinations of these resources do not have enough power output - because they are intermittent resources, Apple is using battery power to replace the need?
I find it more probable that Apple has enough contractual or even installed capability to run at 100%. Having installed capability does not equate to what is available from the unit. For example, a 100MW wind farm (installed capability) rarely outputs 100MW, so to truly get 100MW at all times, you may have to install a 500MW windfarm. (assuming a 20% capacity factor) I highly doubt Apple would install up to 500MW, as this would be a ridiculously stupid idea.
Saying that you are "now running on 100% Renewable Energy" also implies that Apple is somehow managing its supply to demand via these resources in perfect harmony. HIGHLY doubtful.
Here is what is happening....the resources are pumping power into the grid. To the extent the power offsets or exceeds Apple's demand...great, they may even receive a credit from their local utility. To the extent there is no wind, sun, or low water levels, Apple is buying from the local utility.
I find it more probable that Apple has enough contractual or even installed capability to run at 100%. Having installed capability does not equate to what is available from the unit. For example, a 100MW wind farm (installed capability) rarely outputs 100MW, so to truly get 100MW at all times, you may have to install a 500MW windfarm. (assuming a 20% capacity factor) I highly doubt Apple would install up to 500MW, as this would be a ridiculously stupid idea.
Saying that you are "now running on 100% Renewable Energy" also implies that Apple is somehow managing its supply to demand via these resources in perfect harmony. HIGHLY doubtful.
Here is what is happening....the resources are pumping power into the grid. To the extent the power offsets or exceeds Apple's demand...great, they may even receive a credit from their local utility. To the extent there is no wind, sun, or low water levels, Apple is buying from the local utility.
Not true. Most corporations dont adopt green technology to simply make more profit. They use it because it is the right thing to do for the health of the planet. The added benefit is that such moves are positively viewed by the public, thus potentially improving the overall image of the company. Typically, for a standard business whose main focus of operations does not involve the green economy, environmental and sustainability initiatives are perused when they dont negatively impact the bottom line of the company past a certain threshold. If profit was the motivating factor, you wouldnt really have any companies pursing sustainability initiatives.
Some people always find something to complain ....
Honestly I don't care too much about their true motivation (which no one here on the forum knows) - but I love that they are investing in renewable energy and setting an example that hopefully others follow
If they do it for 'PR', fine by me ... if they do it because they love our planet, even better.
Now Google & Samsung: it is your turn to 'copy' this. (and if you do, I won't blame you for it, I will applaud)
Apple gets huge economies of scale in its giant solar farm compared to what you have on your roof. So while expensive, it isn't nearly as expensive on a per kW basis as your roof installation. And it makes them less dependent on the local electric company's rates.
So, by simply increasing price per unit, they can decrease their emissions per dollar. Great plan!
yes - and also on another positive note: the more those panels are getting used and mass produced, the cheaper they should get. So I would assume if other big companies follow that example, it should become some day cheaper (and probably more advanced) for the single family home owner.