Slashdot Mirror
Google Explains Why It Became an Energy Trader
angry tapir writes "Google has explained how it might use its status as an energy-trading company to increase the use of renewable energy sources in its data centers. In February, the company's Google Energy subsidiary received approval from the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to buy and sell power on the wholesale market."
It is currently illegal to resell electricity that you generate using 'waste'.
So say you run a heat-treat process. You don't have much incentive to install a way to reprocess that heat. I wish I could remember the TLC/Discovery/History channel special that they had about it...
By becoming an 'energy trader' I'm wondering if Google can skirt these laws and make their data centers more efficient or even energy negative.
Also, this way the extent and sizes of their data centers can be hidden behind a energy trading corp controlled by them.
I wonder if they can get any insight into other energy trading companies' plans and strategy based on the search activities of their employees and executive teams...
You know who else was an energy trading company? /I keed.
Actually it's a little more complex than that. Greenpeace rated apple way, way low on the "environment-friendly" scale because they use PVC plastics in some of their products. Very few, actually. Apple had no comment on this; but they were making much less power-hungry products, with much less lead than anyone else, with more efficient packaging, on more efficient processes. For this small misstep and a complete lack of care to deal with Greenpeace's bullshit, Greenpeace ranked them way down.
In other words, Greenpeace rates you as "environmentally friendly" if you dance for them at request. They are not a standards body, they don't publish a spec you barely fall inside to score well; they say "DANCE MONKEY!" and you dance or they cry to the world that you won't play nice with them.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
I'm all for supporting a cause, but there are few organizations more ridiculous than Greenpeace. (I'll mention PETA to get it out of the way, but lets not derail).
My mother works for a certain Oil and Gas Company here in Canada. A rather Large one. She was actually one of the people who helped start the oilsands projects, which I agree is terrible for the environment but has made Canada a little more self sufficient, so I'm torn on whether its a good or a bad thing. Anyways, the position she happens to hold is the Environmental/Health and Safety Director. So she has quite a few interesting stories regarding GreenPeace. On some matters, she can't even tell me what happened, confidential information. (Since this is the internet I'm trying not to disclose any information I shouldn't).
But I do remember Greenpeace, rather than just protesting or picketting, they went and snuck their way into one of the refineries up there. They wanted to set up a banner or something atop one of the structures. The pathway they chose was along this big conveyor belt, which they had shut down, and started to climb. So, now not only had they commited a break and enter on private company property, but they were also disrupting the clockwork system those kinds of factories set up. Now, just about any incompetant foreman could have turned on the conveyor belt again, and the Greenpeace activists would have been pushed into a big fiery pit, but of course they don't hire morons for foremen, and he caught on right away what was going on. I don't know exactly how it all ended, but some arrests were made.
Anyways, the more I look into Greenpeace and what they do, the more I hate them. However noble their cause might be, the idiocy in their actions strikes me as unbelievable. This is NOT how you bring about change.
My favourite Greenpeace press release contained the following sentence:
"In the twenty years since the Chernobyl tragedy, the world's worst nuclear accident, there have been nearly [FILL IN ALARMIST AND ARMAGEDDONIST FACTOID HERE]"
Yes - the bit in caps is theirs.