The Truth About Apple's '100% Renewable' Energy Usage (Apple lies)

Forbes ^ | January 8, 2016 | Alex Epstein

[all the best]

Apple has been claiming, to great public acclaim, that it uses 100% renewable sources of energy such as solar and wind for many of its power needs, including its data centers.

From Apple’s website:

"Since 2012, all our data centers have been powered by 100 percent renewable energy sources. That means no matter how much data they handle, there is a zero greenhouse gas impact on the environment from their energy use." This is a lie.

Apple, like nearly every other international technology company in the world, gets the overwhelming percentage of its power from cheap, plentiful, reliable coal and almost none from expensive, unreliable solar and wind.

The whole truth

Like any other large tech company, Apple requires a lot of energy for its operations–and this energy needs to be cheap and reliable. But today’s politically correct sources of energy, above all solar and wind, are neither reliable nor affordable. To call them “renewables” is a misnomer, because “renewables” advocates generally refuse to support the only cost-effective “renewable” option, large-scale hydroelectric power: building a dam, they say, is not sufficiently “green.” Solar and wind should be called “unreliables” because the intermittent nature of sunlight and wind have made them useless as scalable, reliable sources of energy that can meaningfully substitute for hydro, nuclear, let alone fossil fuel power. These unreliables require subsidies and government mandates to exist.

[all the best]

The author is a great apologist for so-called fossil fuels and free enterprise.

[LearnsFromMistakes]

ping

[itsahoot]

China Syndrome effectively ended any sane energy solutions. Hydroelectric kills fish and Nuclear melts through to China. Doe oh doe what to doooo.

[BeauBo]

Maybe by “renewable”, they mean renewable contracts to keep filling their fuel tanks...

[VanDeKoik]

You’re gonna get it now!

[hadaclueonce]

Renewable electricity generation is the con that the masses are eating up with a spoon.

With the few exceptions, batteries and pumped storage, it is not currently commercially viable for the electric grid.

All that are paying extra for the happy hour brag, look in the mirror, that is the sucker that was born every day.

[i_robot73]

renewable...

...as in the contracts associated w/ their users for the latest/greatest Apple releases every 6 mo. (used to fill their tanks ;D)

Something ‘bout a sucker and his $$??

[BeauBo]

The electrical requirements for a data center are especially demanding.

Power has to be highly reliable (lots of 9’s), and smooth (low noise); even as it is delivered in very large volume. Since it becomes a significant cost for the total operation, cost efficiency is typically tightly managed.

There is no way to get high constant power 24x7 like that from wind and/or solar (hydro can work well).

I guess that they could contract with a utility company which has mixed sources, and pay their full bill at the renewable rate, as a kind of subsidy or offset, like carbon credits.

[this_ol_patriot]

People in my area always say I'm buying my power from a green company in Colorado or someplace, no you're not you get your power from the nuke coal and hydro plants here in York Co., The greenie company acting as a broker just pays First Energy at their contracted rates for the power you used, they may or may not produce any electricity at all.

[dayglored]

> You're gonna get it now!

Incoming pie-fight in ... 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...

[Swordmaker]

You do not understand how this works. The author of this hit piece is basing his argument the left-wing organization TruthOut's claims from August that Apple was lying about it and they also do not understand it as well.

First, TruthOut originally claimed that Apple did not have ANY solar-power systems at all at its North Carolina data center. 100% False.

The building at the top of the photo is Apple's North Carolina Data Center.
The fields of solar cells are the solar-power farm.
Apple is building $2 billon worth more.

"To Apple's credit, though the company's executives are lying about using it, Apple is in fact generating 167 million kilowatt-hours of renewable energy at the facility via its two solar arrays and fuel cells. However, for unknown reasons, Apple chooses to sell the energy it creates to Duke. Sam Watson, general counsel of the North Carolina Utilities Commission, confirmed this arrangement in June 2015. -- TruthOut report from August 2015

When that turned out to be an unviable claim, TruthOut turned to claiming that Apple was actually selling the power they generated for some reprehensible reason instead of using it themselves! They had no idea why Apple would build this huge plant, but then to turn around and sell the clean energy and then buy dirty power? How horrid is that?

Well, you can't educate stupid people, but there is a completely rational reason. To assure continuous energy to the data center, Apple arranged a means guarantee that. . . and to sell its excess power generation to the local power grid run by Duke Energy (a very large company which has many varied sources of energy in its grid from which customers can buy energy). Apple thus sells that 167 million kilo-watt hours of solar and bio-fuel generated power into the grid instead of having to invest in batteries to store it until it needs to use it. This offsets Duke's need to BUY more coal to generate electricity. Apple then buys BACK somewhat less power from Duke than the sell to Duke as needed to power the Data Center. Every co-generation large scale system does this. Nothing unusual or fraudulent about it. It is good power management.

Until Apple reached 100% capability for its solar and bio-fuel systems, Apple arranged to buy power from other non-coal power sources in Duke's grid system. Counting the power Apple pumped into the system and the power they bought from other renewable sources, Apple was indeed 100% powered by renewable sources. Renewable sources INTO the grid, renewable sources OUT of the grid. 100%.

Then the author of this absurd hit piece pulls this NEXT accusation against Apple out of his stupid Liberal A$$! He literally accuses Apple of . . .

"2: Concealing that the vast majority of computer energy use comes from coal-powered manufacturing and the coal-powered Internet."

The author of this HIT PIECE really jumps the shark with that piece of calumny and illogicality. The idiot author imputes the power usage of every single Apple product USER to Apple's power usage and dings Apple with it!

Epstein calls Apple a liar for not counting the power consumed by Apple's customers as its own power consumption. ABSURDITY ON ITS FACE! Does he hold the gasoline usage of automobile owners' as somehow part of the fuel bill of the companies who manufactured that automobile? SHEESH! What a Maroon.

I would also love to know how Apple Consumers can get in on the gravy train Epstein claims Apple uses to succeed in this "fraud." He further claims Apple. . .

"1: Paying off other companies and consumers to give Apple "green credits" for its coal electricity usage."

Epstein makes this amazing accusation but then doesn't provide an iota of evidence or even explain how he comes to this absurd conclusion. Instead, Eptein goes on an extended expedition around the barn about grid energy supplies and Germany, claiming that Apple's solar power farm is a parasite on said grid (again, without evidence or justification in anything except his own overblown ego), takes a side trip to China, wanders into Macs, and iPhone battery charging, and somehow reaches a conclusion never connected by any tracks to any thing bearing any relationship to facts.

Apparently Epstein needs a road map to find his way to the toilet from the hallway in his own house.

[wintertime]

That photo looks like an ecologic desert and an ecologic disaster.

[Swordmaker]

Hilariously wrong headed anti-Apple article claims that Apple is lying about it's US facilities are now using 100% energy sources. Alex Eptein wouldn't know what logic was if it bit him in the backside. For example, he claims that Apple is lying for not including all the user's of Apple products energy in their figuring their 100% renewable sources. . . then he tosses in the fact that the Internet is powered by coal energy, just because as well, as if Apple should be tarred with THAT broad brush of energy use, too. -- PING!

Apple Energy Use ain't 100% renewable,
because, well, just because I say so!
Ping!

The latest Apple/Mac/iOS Pings can be found by searching Keyword "ApplePingList" on FreeRepublic's Search.

If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me

[dennisw]

All those solar panels will be degraded to 40% output in 10 years. They all need base load backup for cloudy rainy days meaning there is always fossil fuel burning backup supplying or ready to supply electricity when the f’in solar panels FAIL

MOST IMPORTANT—— Apple was given huge tax breaks and other govt subsides to put the solar panels up. SOP for the Cupertino fly boys for whom image is everything.

[Crusher138]

A little insight into the reality of solar energy:

Here in New Mexico, a very solar friendly state, if you are served by a power grid and put up panels on your business or home, you are required by law to feed the power to the grid, not your business or home directly. One solar company I spoke to said that a good electrician could route the power to your home, but it would be a bad idea without storage devices and capacitors to regulate the power flow. If you generate more than you use, then you are ostensibly running on 100% renewable energy.

Solar panels have gotten MUCH better as of lately. Current estimates are for a less than 10% reduction in efficiency over 30 years with many solar companies offering 30 year warranties with efficiency guarantees.

[Swordmaker]

Solar panels have gotten MUCH better as of lately. Current estimates are for a less than 10% reduction in efficiency over 30 years with many solar companies offering 30 year warranties with efficiency guarantees.

Any time DennisW von Munchausen posts in an Apple thread you can be absolutely certain not a word in it is true.

In this instance, both the article, and the Barron's comments are vying for which one is the most untruthful. As I pointed out, the most efficient way to handle solar power is to connect to the grid, piping your power generated into the grid, selling the generated power to the power company and then buying what you need. This avoids the necessity of having to buy very expensive power accumulations systems such as batteries or capacitors for storage for later use, puts your excess production to immediate use, ameliorates the utility's need to build more power plants, and simultaneously provides YOUR need for clean, steady, guaranteed available power 24/7. That's a win-win that the article author and TruthOut just don't seem to grasp in claiming that Apple was lying when they claim their facilities of now 100% self-sustaining.

As a matter of fact, Apple's solar generation is a profit point for Apple. They make money by selling power to the local utilities around their plants because they generate more power than they use.

[dennisw]

Solar panels have gotten MUCH better as of lately. Current estimates are for a less than 10% reduction in efficiency over 30 years with many solar companies offering 30 year warranties with efficiency guarantees.

I would not trust any of those 30 year (lol) guarantees. I would not trust any of them to actually transfer cash back to me in event of "premature" failure of solar panels.
Just think it through a bit. Sensitive diodes are exposed to harsh sunlight to generate electricity... and they do not degrade??? and a lot more than that bs 10%

Not attacking you. Just the solar propaganda out there

[dennisw]

96.96 is where AAPL finished.

“NEVER MARRY A STOCK”

[dennisw]

All well and good...I love your Apple agitprop... “You Gotta Serve Somebody” —Bob Dylan
AND you have chosen the Apple/Cook/Jobs cult

Anyways how many millions in free govt money (Federale and California) did Tim Kook get to put up those bullsht solar panels. It’s a racket! For the Cupertino toyboys

No need to answer because Apple will never make that public but we all know they are money grubbing welfare mama parasites when it comes to stealing money from the taxpayers for their bullcrap solar panels

[dennisw]

That photo looks like an ecologic desert and an ecologic disaster.

I had the same thoughts. The dumbass urbanites (gay and not gay) would be appalled. They are Apples primes sales demographic.