[cowtowney]

“Hmm. I suspect they will have to hide he real power source for the data farm. Even 170 acres of solar cells won’t do the job when it’s dark. Or raining. Or cloudy.”

So, if it works even 50% of the time, they’ve saved on electricity (less their solar costs).

It’s private capital. I am going to assume they’ve run the numbers. No way this is a PR move.

[2ndDivisionVet]

You’re assuming it’s private capital. I’m doubting it. Remember who is in the White House.

[Perdogg]

For proper installation you have to do a “cloud analysis” to properly locate the panels. Using more inverters will help the efficiency.

Some states allows people/businesses to sell back power. It would be good move to reduce cost during peak demand.

As long as they do it on their own dime, I have no issue with it.

[CodeToad]

” I am going to assume they’ve run the numbers. No way this is a PR move.”

PLease. It is a total PR move. Solar takes several decades to pay off, if it ever does. It makes no business sense whatsoever.

[RJS1950]

Considering the Apple ties to the democrat socialist party, I would not be surprised if some digging revealed a large green jobs/green energy based infusion of taxpayer dollars into this project.

[saganite]

Less their solar costs is a hell of a lot. It isn’t just install and hook up and that’s it. Solar panels require intensive maintenance. Despite your claims that it’s private capital I doubt it is all funded out of Apple’s pocket. There are huge subsidies involved from the govt to encourage these things. Apple is obviously taking advantage of every penny of subsidy. I suspect the primary purpose is for PR though. They have billions and their clientele is “green” so it’s good business to have pictures of some nice shiny mirrors outside they can put in their sales literature. They’re certainly not doing it because it’s cost effective.

[businessprofessor]

It’s private capital. I am going to assume they’ve run the numbers. No way this is a PR move.

You are misinformed about the economics of solar power. This project is a product of heavy government subsidies, not private investment decisions. Subsidies permeate this project from federal/state tax credits, utility forced investments, utility power mandates, and net metering (forcing utilities to offset power use with excess solar power generated). Without this boatload of subsidies, this project would be laughed out of Apple's capital budgeting mix. The subsidies are paid by higher government borrowing, taxes, and utility rates. Most of the manufacturing is performed in China.

[hinckley buzzard]

Well, of course it is at least partially a PR move. Why do you think you are reading about it?

[Myrddin]

It’s private capital. I am going to assume they’ve run the numbers. No way this is a PR move.

I'll bet they ran the numbers. Big tax incentives to install the solar equipment. It is exactly PR. Apple being "green". When it fails to do the job, they write it off as a loss. Another way to save on their tax bills. It's not an area known for being excessively sunny. A Mojave desert location would be believable, but Apple already understands what total boneheads CA regulators can be.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

It’s private capital.

Are there government subsidies for all this "green" stuff. If is obvious that loan guarantees are.

[FourPeas]

No way this is a PR move.

Now _that's_ funny,

[dennisw]

It’s private capital. I am going to assume they’ve run the numbers. No way this is a PR move.

LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

Don't forget to face Apple Mecca when you pray today