101–110 of 273 posts
>"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’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…
Generally all you have to do is account for all the costs. Just like dumping pollution into a river can seem economical from the point of view of the dumper, but not from the point of view of the people who live in the area.
The bit you quote is presumably going even further, and saying that even without taking into account the wider costs, it still makes economic sense in that narrow sense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it? Intel has been purchasing large quantities of green energy for years. In the last few year it has been 100% of the their overall consumption [1]. Is there any difference in what the two companies are trying to achieve? [1] https://www.epa.gov/greenpower/green-power-partnership-natio...
Biomass is considered "green energy"? Why?! Also that chart is US-only, while the story about Google here is that Google will go 100% renewable energy globally .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it? Intel has been purchasing large quantities of green energy for years. In the last few year it has been 100% of the their overall consumption [1]. Is there any difference in what the two companies are trying to achieve? [1] https://www.epa.gov/greenpower/green-power-partnership-natio...
Biomass is considered "green energy"? Why?! Also that chart is US-only, while the story about Google here is that Google will go 100% renewable energy globally .
There's a considerable amount of embodied energy and embodied pollution in Solar Panel and Wind Turbine construction. I think this is lost on most people in Silicon Valley.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life-cycle_greenhouse-gas_emis...
This is pretty awesome, Google is definitely leading the industry here. One of the more interesting things I learned while working for Google was the intricate way in which the "grid" is managed by a separate but co-operating set of entities. Google disrupted that happy bunch by creating a wholly owned subsidiary that was a licensed power company[1]. That gave it standing to buy from and sell energy to the grid and i…
> Google is definitely leading the industry here. It's fantastic that Google plans to switch to renewables since they are one of the biggest players. Definitely an exaggeration to say that they are leading the charge. Apple was among the first to make renewables an issue and achieved 100% in data centers back in 2013, with little fanfare. http://www.datacenterdynamics.com/content-tracks/design-buil... And creating a…
Google is a much much larger energy consumer, has been carbon neutral since 2007, and is going to use 100% renewables globally within the next year.
Also, Google made its energy company play back in 2010. Apple made theirs in 2016.
This is pretty awesome, Google is definitely leading the industry here. One of the more interesting things I learned while working for Google was the intricate way in which the "grid" is managed by a separate but co-operating set of entities. Google disrupted that happy bunch by creating a wholly owned subsidiary that was a licensed power company[1]. That gave it standing to buy from and sell energy to the grid and i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Google is definitely leading the industry here. It's fantastic that Google plans to switch to renewables since they are one of the biggest players. Definitely an exaggeration to say that they are leading the charge. Apple was among the first to make renewables an issue and achieved 100% in data centers back in 2013, with little fanfare. http://www.datacenterdynamics.com/content-tracks/design-buil... And creating a…
Just to be clear, 7% of Apple's global power is still dirty and they have not made any public commitment to bring that down any further. Google is a much much larger energy consumer, has been carbon neutral since 2007, and is going to use 100% renewables globally within the next year. Also, Google made its energy company play back in 2010. Apple made theirs in 2016.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Biomass is considered "green energy"? Why?! Also that chart is US-only, while the story about Google here is that Google will go 100% renewable energy globally .
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.