I think this is lost on most people in Silicon Valley.
Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017
91–100 of 273 posts
Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017
#92This 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.
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…
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>"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).
Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017
#95There'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.
Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017
#96There'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.
Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017
#97There'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.
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
#98The 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…
Re: Google says it will run entirely on renewable energy in 2017
#99Earlier 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 .