Sorry, but almost no others have gone as far as Apple in making their facilities completely independent of the grid. Certainly no others have done so on the scale that Apple has. Apple is actually 100% independent and selling power back into the grid from their overly sufficient power plants. They in the majority of its facilities and produces more power than is required to run those facilities. The tax credits are only a minority percentage of installation costs but the operation entirely offsets 100% of the cost of electrical energy they WOULD have had to buy, and then they are able to SELL of the excess production over and above what they have capacity to store in batteries back onto the grid. . . that's profit to Apple's bottom line.
You disagree that Apple is saving millions of dollars each year in energy costs? What do you base such a determination on? You have no facts to base your claim they are NOT saving millions of dollars in the money they would otherwise be expending in buying electricity they no longer have to buy from the local electric utility. In just one example, Apple's $2 billion Oregon datacenter is 100% energy independent through a solar energy farm. The cost for installation was approximately $120 million, offset by a $48 million tax credit. original estimated energy costs from the grid to power the data center were ~$12 million per year. Energy costs with the 100% solar farm, including maintenance, ~$2 million per year. Savings in costs over buying power from the grid, ~$10 million per year. Apple has twelve of these data centers around the world, and is building four more, all of them to be 100%, Just because you believe the claim of the "non-renewable" energy producers that "renewables can't be profitable without tax credits" does not make it true. There IS a break-even point, the point at when a profit can start being made, even absent Tax Credits.
That said, CodeToad, what world do you live in where these Alternate Energy Tax Credits don't exist? They are a fact. Do they suddenly go away in your world and eliminate profits that include them in their calculations? The fact is that they DO EXIST and profits do not exclude them.
These purchase/Installment type tax credits usually are applicable for just ONE SINGLE YEAR, the year in which the renewable energy asset was purchased/installed, especially for a company such as Apple with its huge profits where there isn't much ability to carry tax credits over to another tax year, they are not an on-going credit. In addition, CodeToad, such credits apply ONLY for renewable assets installed in the United States or in California; they do not apply for Apple's renewable energy assets in foreign countries where Apple has also installed the same kind of renewable energy resources. However, Apple pays its income taxes in the USA where it can only use such credits for US installations, not in those foreign jurisdictions, most of which don't provide such credits in any case.
Nice try.
“Alternate Energy Tax Credits “
Remove those and tell us Apple is self sufficient. Until then, they are not.
“There IS a break-even point, the point at when a profit can start being made, even absent Tax Credits. “
No one has ever yet to see it. Promises, promises, but let us know when alternative energy is profitable.