Green Earth, Our Earth :)
Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017
131–140 of 273 posts
Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Google is a much much larger energy consumer That seems implausible. The electrical requirements of Aluminum production are extreme. Obviously there's a lot of issues about where one draws the line between the company and its subcontractors and so on, but it seems hard to believe Apple's global energy footprint is not higher than Google's
I didn't know Apple produced its own aluminum.
Apple includes their suppliers, retail stores, offices, and customers' product use in their carbon footprint (in addition to data centers) [1]:
When we measure our carbon footprint, we include hundreds of suppliers, millions of customers, and hundreds of millions of devices. And we’re always looking for ways to make the biggest difference in five major areas: manufacturing, product use, facilities, transportation, and recycling.
Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017
#133This story is clearly political.
Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017
#134>"It’s good for the economy, good for business and good for our shareholders ". Let's be honest...it is not good for their shareholders. They are buying power at a significant premium and costing their shareholders money. It is a direct hit to the bottom line. This might be good for the environment - at the very least they are helping renewable energy companies get bank financing through purchase guarantees, which wi…
It may good for shareholders in a more nefarious way (PR).
Every time I see this "doing anything green is bad for shareholders" meme, it involves an assumption that PR is worthless. If that's not what Google's leaders think, than the complainers should buy a different stock. Free market and all that.
Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017
#135This is great progress and congratulations to Google. But Google and every other tech company is effectively still running on non-renewable energy by virtue of importing most of their hardware from places where manufacturing is done mostly with fossil fuels. All of us are outsourcing our pollution and CO2 production.
Most of the lifetime CO2 footprint of data center hardware is from the operational phase, not manufacturing. This (somewhat dated) paper from Dell indicates that 90% of the CO2 footprint of a rack mounted server comes from the usage phase: http://i.dell.com/sites/content/corporate/corp-comm/en/Docum...
That's right, with the numbers looking similar when looking at proportions of energy consumption in buildings which is slightly different from just CO2 footprint.
The operational phase is where to look at having the largest impact. In buildings looking at a 75 year time frame you have the operational phase accounting for 94.4% of life cycle primary energy consumption. Where the manufacturing phase such as production of building materials, transportation and constructing the building accounts for 2.2% of life cycle primary energy consumption. [1]
1. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378778803...
Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Google is a much much larger energy consumer That seems implausible. The electrical requirements of Aluminum production are extreme. Obviously there's a lot of issues about where one draws the line between the company and its subcontractors and so on, but it seems hard to believe Apple's global energy footprint is not higher than Google's
I didn't know Apple produced its own aluminum.
No--it's probally bought very reasonably in China, or whomever offers the cheapest quote, and the best aluminum?
When one claims to be a saint, it's human nature to to look up and down the chain.
Especially, at what they charge? This is one company I don't give a free pass to anymore.
(I did hear they bought the best aluminum from Australia a few years ago.)
Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depends on how the biomass is generated, but stuff that was just going to decompose anyway, like pig slurry, might as well be processed into a form that can be burnt for energy.
This is not my area of expertise but is burning something the same as letting it decompose naturally? Seems like burning could release different emissions than just the natural decomposition. How is it processed into a burnable form using 0 (renewable? clean?) energy?
One of the differences is that decomposing happens in the form of Methane, which is a potent greenhouse gas (21x as potent as CO2).
Capturing and burning the methane "downgrades" the potency of the emissions, now only emitting CO2.
Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017
#138Is anyone discussing _reliability_? as in Google/Apple/etc are making this move not just "to be green" but to ensure that they do have power without being subjected to the whims & issues of providers when they're just one of many customers? When you have literally hundreds of millions (billions?) of customers, you want to ensure your own resources are absolutely reliable (within your, not someone else's, requirements).
It's like me wanting to put solar panels on my roof: I'm not so much interested in cost savings, but want to ensure a massive grid failure doesn't take my household with it.
Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017
#139Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017
#140[deleted]