Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 273 posts

Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017

#171

Post by matchagaucho »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #165
matchagaucho wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kind of buried in the article... but Google is claiming the net of their investments in renewable energy will offset their usage of fossil fuels. That's different than switching to a new energy source.

Does that change the message for you? As I see it the investments are the leading edge of the change over. So a combination of setting up a way to benefit from available clean energy (being a power company and being able to buy directly from the supplier), and investing in companies that produce clean energy or improve efficiency to keep the market moving so that the late adopters have something to adopt.

Yes, it is leading edge and admirable. I applaud the effort but question the headline.

A Google datacenter near the Columbia River may derive 100% of it's energy from hydro. Google pioneered that practice and many others followed. But their overall real estate footprint relies heavily on local energy suppliers, which may be coal.

Any company making a claim of being 100% renewable, is basically just using offsets.

And offsets are a way the government allows companies to (metaphorically) continue driving down the road in gas-guzzling SUVs, but make investments in renewable energy to offset their footprint.

Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017

#174

Post by detaro »

problems wrote: post #173

Wondering if any residential provider in the world is offering a service where you can say "sell me only renewables". There'd probably be a cost associated with this, but I think I'd have to consider it if it were available locally.

These are quite common here in Germany.

Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017

#175

Post by crpatino »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #165
matchagaucho wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kind of buried in the article... but Google is claiming the net of their investments in renewable energy will offset their usage of fossil fuels. That's different than switching to a new energy source.

Does that change the message for you? As I see it the investments are the leading edge of the change over. So a combination of setting up a way to benefit from available clean energy (being a power company and being able to buy directly from the supplier), and investing in companies that produce clean energy or improve efficiency to keep the market moving so that the late adopters have something to adopt.

Yes, it does change the whole meaning of this. Running even just the datacenters in renewable energy alone is a huge technical and organizational undertaking, - maybe on par with Project Manhattan and the Apollo Program. Doing the carbon neutral gimick is, - until hard proof is presented to show actual reduction in fosil fuels usage, - little more than good intentions and financial sophistry.

Don't get me wrong, it is a good thing they are doing at least this much... but in my opinion they are getting a huge, undeserved PR boon out of this. Companies like Oracle could not get away with this, even if they tried. In my eyes, and until hard evidence is presented to disproof this, I think they are still milking all the goodwill from the "don't be evil" motto from yesteryear.

Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017

#176

Post by problems »

detaro wrote: post #174
problems wrote: post #173

Wondering if any residential provider in the world is offering a service where you can say "sell me only renewables". There'd probably be a cost associated with this, but I think I'd have to consider it if it were available locally.

These are quite common here in Germany.

What's the cost increase like? Do you know anyone doing it?

Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017

#177

Post by maxerickson »

problems wrote: post #173

Wondering if any residential provider in the world is offering a service where you can say "sell me only renewables". There'd probably be a cost associated with this, but I think I'd have to consider it if it were available locally.

In the US it depends on the provider and state, but there are lots of providers that offer a renewable tier (maybe not 100%).

http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/buying_power....

The prices are 1 or 2 cents higher (per kilowatt) in many areas.

Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017

#178

Post by low_battery »

CPLX wrote: post #118
evanws wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> 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

Why? Aluminum production needs a lot of electricity but if you recycle back, costs goes down, total aluminum energy cost of Apple is likely much lower than all those servers running throughout the year.

Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017

#179

Post by crpatino »

mulmen wrote: post #110
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #99

Earlier 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?

Also not my area of expertise, but I think the idea behind the biomass == carbon neutral is that the carbon in those fuels was already in the atmosphere a few year ago, so you are not really tapping into the fosil fuels stored in the Earth's manttle. You can consider this a form of low-tech solar, since the biomass had to ultimatelly use photosyntesis to accumulate energy.

Also, if done sustainably, you have to keep sustaining life forms that keep doing the photosyntesis trick for you every year. i.e. All those carbon atoms in this year's crop of Christmas Trees were in the atmosphere a couple of years ago, and we are potentially breathing out at least part of the crops from the next few years... But if someone goes and cuts down a big chunk of the Amazonas in order to make "bio-fuels", yeah, that's dishonest, stupid and self defeating.

Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017

#180

Post by JBReefer »

problems wrote: post #173

Wondering if any residential provider in the world is offering a service where you can say "sell me only renewables". There'd probably be a cost associated with this, but I think I'd have to consider it if it were available locally.

It's so common here in NYC that there's a scam where people go door to door, trick you into believing you're signing up for 100% wind power, and then jack up prices after a few months.
Post reply on HN