Live data from Hacker News

Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017

nytimes.com

91–100 of 273 posts

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

#92
post #16

This 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.

One step at a time. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

Data centers are an easier target because you have more flexibility. And to provide a counterexample, Apple recently pressured Foxconn to power certain parts of iPhone manufacturing with renewables by 2018. We'll see if the two companies deliver on that goal.

https://www.apple.com/pr/library/2015/10/22Apple-Launches-Ne...

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

#93

>"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…

If Google believes that running off renewable energy will help protect their business in the future then this is good for shareholders. Shareholders care about the future value of stock, so if running off fossil fuels is deemed a business risk and this can mitigate that risk then it is good for the value of the stock.

Of course in the short term it might impact the bottom line but so long as the business trajectory is positive and Google's stock continues to be perceived as a good investment then that shouldn't matter.

And your issue with the line: "In some places, like Chile, Google said, renewables have at times become cheaper than fossil fuels."

Meh, it's PR, take it with a grain of salt and remember this isn't a peer reviewed paper.

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

#94
post #67

>"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…

Well, it all depends on the definition of good. Shareholders are people too, and for now, live on planet Earth and are thus affected by Google's energy usage. Also, from a economic perspective, the good can come from e.g. brand acceptance (and other indirect sources).

I'm guessing it really is good for shareholders in the simplest terms of dollars too; unsubsidized wind and solar electricity have only recently started to reach cost parity but with tax incentives the PPAs being signed really are less expensive than long term contracts for fossil electricity. So it's good for the environment and good for shareholders. (I'd be more sympathetic to complaints about the tax credits offered to renewable energy if we could go back to the beginning and eliminate all tax credits offered to fossil energy too, plus properly account for their externalities, but since that's going to happen when hell freezes over I'm fine with adding another layer of tax incentives for renewables.)

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

#97

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.

Yes, but there is also a considerable amount of energy involved with extracting fossil fuels, refining them, and delivering them between those steps and the end users.

And there are so many pollution externalities: increased risk of disasters like spills, and people who get respiratory diseases/cancers from breathing polluted air and die early.

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

#98

The title is misleading. They will not run entirely on renewable energy. Instead, they are buying at least as much renewable energy as they are consuming in total. So Google might pay for 1 megawatt of solar power going into the grid, but actually pull 1 megawatt of fossil fuel power. This is more than a nitpicking point. The reason why renewable energy isn't a totally viable energy source is because of problems with…

They also buy in the general location of their datacenters. It doesn't always match up exactly, but they are aiming for slightly better than just a purely numerical correspondence.

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

#99
post #84
post #71

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 .

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.
Post reply on HN