Fact: There isn’t a single alternative energy system that is profitable. Not a single one. Apple isn’t pulling any miracle here, they are just fudging the numbers.
Any solar system can produce some to sell back, but that doesn’t mean it is profitable.
Playing gimmicks with accounting is just lying.
Well...there's hydro. It's, like...organic man.
You are the one making claims you can't back up. Apple is 100% energy independent at most of their plants and installations and is selling the excess power back into the grid. They have PAID CASH for the assets and except for the newest plants and buildings going in this year, the Tax Credits have expired.
The energy they are receiving from these passive energy installations costs Apple only the maintenance costs which they generally would have had to expend similar maintenance costs for energy from the grid. All else being equal to costs of energy from the grid which has a daily and monthly retail COST, while the energy they receive from their now FREE sources has only the maintenance and overhead costs they would have incurred anyway, Apple is NOT EXPENDING a single dollar they would have expended in buying energy which, compared to what they would have spent is hundreds of millions of dollars world wide. Those expenses are therefore NOT deducted from the gross profits of Apple's bottom line.
Apple's energy production from these installations is designed to provide more than enough power for even peak demand on the heaviest days, so that on most days on which they do not draw that amount of power, it is diverted to storage batteries. When those batteries are fully charged, that excess production, which cannot be turned off, is diverted into the main power grid and sold to the local public utility at the going wholesale rate per kilowatt hour. I.E. Apple is SELLING their excess energy onto the grid.
Those savings from not having to buy energy retail are being added to their bottom line profits and the revenue of what they sell wholesale is added to the bottom line also. Ergo, Apple is making a profit on their alternative power production.
You cannot refute those facts by repeating, over and over, again and again, stamping your feet, having a tizzy-fit, the same false-to-fact, out-of-date mantra you once read somewhere. You've provided ZERO evidence to back up your claim. None. ZIP! Nada. On the other hand, I have provided numbers, evidence, and proof. . . and at least one major corporations that is doing exactly what you repeatedly claim is impossible.
As for your claim that Apple is "fudging numbers," all of this is done according to GAAP, Generally Accepted Accounting Practices, and Apple's Financial Statements, which are publicly posted, are Audited annually as required by the Securities and Exchange Commission.
By so publishing and making these statements in official statements, the management of Apple has made this claim a matter of truthful fact and were they lying, as you assert and If you could so prove, under the Federal Sarbanes Oxley Law of 2002, the officers and managers of Apple would be personally liable for mandatory fines of up to $20,000,000 and/or prison sentences of 10/20 years as these claims were made as official claims of the corporation which would have a significant effect on the value of the company thus defrauding the investors. They are NOT "fudging the numbers."
You keep on dancing as fast and as ridiculously as you can, denying facts, to idiotic music which cannot back you up with anything other than your unsupported claims as you try to prove a negative. As I said, all it requires to shoot your claim down in flames is a single instance of alternative energy sources making a profit. Sometimes all it requires is to do on a sufficiently large enough scale to get initial costs down. Apple has the acreage and leverage to do it.
In the meantime, you just go on living on your alternate world where facts are not important.