Slashdot Mirror


All Apple Operations Now Run Off 100 Percent Renewable Energy (9to5mac.com)

According to a recently-shared press release, Apple has finally hit its goal of running its own operations off 100% renewable energy. "All Apple facilities, from Apple Park to its data centers to worldwide fleet of Apple retail stores, are now solely powered by green energy," reports 9to5Mac. From the report: This figure does not include Apple's third-party suppliers or manufacturers, although the company is convincing many of those to switch to 100% renewable sources too. Apple's environment VP Lisa Jackson discussed the news in an interview with Fast Company. Jackson highlights how Apple has not only focused on reducing emissions but also contributed to the availability of green energy on the grid. Apple has gone from 16% renewable energy to 100% in eight years, with CO2 emissions falling by 58%. The company has built numerous wind and solar farms in cooperation with local institutions, as well as intense focus on environmental sustainability during development of its new buildings like Apple Park. Its data centers are flanked by fields of solar panels. Filling out the last 4% required Apple to find renewable energy sources in some of its more remote retail stores and offices. It has signed power purchase agreements in Brazil, India, Israel, Mexico and Turkey.

116 comments

  1. Re: Come join me in the Swamp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tastes like a treasonburger.

  2. Re: Come join me in the Swamp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Today the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York executed a series of search warrants and seized the privileged communications between my client, Michael Cohen, and his clients," Cohen's attorney Stephen Ryan said over the noise of the shredders.

  3. Re:Come join me in the Swamp by sexconker · · Score: 0

    Last week it was confirmed that Donald Trump was not the subject of a criminal investigation.

    How long will he be in jail?
    What were the verdict and sentence?
    When is the trial?
    Where is the evidence?
    What are the charges?
    Why are you crying?

  4. Yeah right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    How does that work in the middle of a windless night? You may make the same amount of green power as used by your data centers but to say that you never fall back to âoedirtyâ grid power at any time is not a claim I can believe.

    1. Re:Yeah right. by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Most of my countries power is from renewable, about 80% I think.

      It's mostly from hydro power. Wind and solar isn't the only option.

      Thermal solar plants can produce power at night too. The sun heats up stuff, that heat is used to spin turbines.

    2. Re: Yeah right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Batteries are not practical for a data center. Even very large battery arrays would Power a DC for minutes. The other reply about hydro is a good point that would definitely help fill the void.

    3. Re: Yeah right. by sit1963nz · · Score: 1

      Huh...who knew...oh wait https://electrek.co/2018/01/23...

    4. Re: Yeah right. by kenh · · Score: 1

      They buy offsets and use power generated locally by conventional means.

      --
      Ken
    5. Re:Yeah right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of the available hydro power in the US is already being used to about capacity. Also, dams tend to have a significant environment cost.

    6. Re:Yeah right. by blindseer · · Score: 1

      Most of my countries power is from renewable, about 80% I think.

      Which country would that be? Or, would you rather we just guess?

      It's mostly from hydro power. Wind and solar isn't the only option.

      Hydro, wind, and solar are only options if the climate and geography allow it. I'm sure it's nice to have access to such ample supplies of hydroelectric power but that's not available to everyone. Solar power probably works great between the 45th parallels but for those living close to the poles solar doesn't work so well. The wind does blow almost everywhere but that can be a problem in places it blows too much. Then there are issues of the intermittent nature of wind and solar.

      Thermal solar plants can produce power at night too. The sun heats up stuff, that heat is used to spin turbines.

      That's nice in theory, does it work in practice? Once I see some actual solar thermal storage power plants in operation then I'll believe it works.

      Do you know what can also heat up salt to 600C and use that heat to spin turbines? Nuclear fission. Do such facilities exist yet? No, that's why I won't claim them as alternatives to wind, solar, and hydro. I suspect that such solar thermal storage systems will be easily replaced with a nuclear reactor that can keep producing power day and night, keeping that molten salt nice and hot regardless of the weather.

      France gets 75% of its electricity from nuclear fission right now, so we know it works and produces little CO2 per kWh. I suspect we'll see molten salt cooled systems in 10 or 20 years, and once that happens the problems of nuclear power not load following and such disappear. If solar heated molten salt can load follow, provide backup power, desalinate water, or whatever people claim that solar heated salt can do then nuclear heated salt can do it too. The difference is that nuclear doesn't have to be in a sunny location.

      Solar is expensive, takes a lot of valuable land, is unreliable, and produces a lot of waste we don't know how to manage yet. Solar power is just a money pit. Maybe someday it will be competitive but for right now it's the energy source of last resort to anyone without access to government subsidies. Wind and hydro seem like good ideas to me if there are favorable conditions for it.

      I've seen countries talk proudly of their "green" energy with hydro and then find out most of the dams are nearly 100 years old. That's not being "green" that's just a previous generation being so desperate for electricity that they'd build these huge dams.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    7. Re: Yeah right. by mspohr · · Score: 1

      I drove past this solar thermal plant today. Running well.
      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
      Here's a list of others
      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    8. Re: Yeah right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course solar thermal exists. OP's point was about solar thermal storage.

    9. Re: Yeah right. by blindseer · · Score: 1

      That's nice. I'm sure those solar plants are in fact running well in sunny Arizona, Spain, and India. What about us here in snowy Midwestern America?

      How much do they cost and how much energy can they produce? I did a quick search of the few that actually had thermal storage and they cost nearly a billion dollars and produce maybe 500 GWh of electricity per year. A nuclear power plant may cost 10 billion dollars but it will also produce 10 times as much electricity, and not take up near as much land to do it.

      So, I'll say you got me on the existence of solar thermal storage. I didn't do my homework there. I'm curious on how much this electricity costs compared to nuclear. I have a printout here on my desk from 2009 saying that solar thermal costs twice as much as nuclear, did they manage to bring that price down? A quick look at some of those power plants in the list you linked tells me they didn't.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    10. Re:Yeah right. by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      New Zealand

    11. Re: Yeah right. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      That's nice. I'm sure those solar plants are in fact running well in sunny Arizona, Spain, and India. What about us here in snowy Midwestern America?

      HVDC

      How much do they cost and how much energy can they produce?

      Thermal solar is expensive, and the falling cost of PV solar is pricing it out of the market. The "storage" feature of thermal solar is mostly pointless since daytime electricity is generally worth MORE than nighttime electricity. So it is more cost effective to just feed power into the grid rather than store it.

    12. Re: Yeah right. by blindseer · · Score: 1

      HVDC

      How much does that cost? What's the carbon footprint of all that steel and aluminum?

      Then there is the problem of having access to enough sun to meet the demand for electricity. The USA might be able to pull this off. What of Japan? Or, UK? I'm sure someone will want to bring up off shore windmills. How much does that cost? What's the carbon footprint? What happens if a hostile neighboring nation decides to start sinking windmills and cutting undersea power lines?

      Nothing has a smaller carbon footprint than nuclear, except maybe hydro. Nothing is cheaper than nuclear except fossil fuels and maybe wind. Nothing is safer than nuclear.

      Solar is expensive and is not all that great on it's carbon footprint, at least compared to nuclear, wind, and hydro. Solar is intermittent and requires locations with lots of sun. Addressing that with batteries, thermal storage, and long power lines, only adds to the not all that great costs and carbon footprint. Mixing it with wind and hydro still means using energy that's often more expensive than nuclear, has a larger carbon footprint than nuclear, still requires long power lines and/or storage (further adding to the cost and carbon footprint).

      Does this mean we should use only nuclear? No, but it does mean using it as a major energy source. Maybe wind and solar will win in the future, until that happens we need to use something else. That means nuclear or coal.

      Nuclear power can use HVDC too, you know that don't you? If you don't want nuclear in your backyard then put it in mine.

      Thermal solar is expensive, and the falling cost of PV solar is pricing it out of the market. The "storage" feature of thermal solar is mostly pointless since daytime electricity is generally worth MORE than nighttime electricity. So it is more cost effective to just feed power into the grid rather than store it.

      That's only true so long as there are reliable energy sources on the grid to go with the solar. Right now, today, that means natural gas. Not the efficient boilers either, but turbines typically used for meeting peak demands. That means twice the carbon footprint, and twice the cost to the consumer, of a boiler. You will need some kind of storage if solar (or other unreliable energy source) is going to be more than perhaps 20% of electrical supply. Right now, today, storage means hydro. There are a few battery storage systems, and solar thermal storage, but for the most part its hydro. If there are no dams around then there's the high cost, carbon footprint, and land usage for storage. Right now nuclear needs storage too, at least until we figure out how to make it load follow like natural gas turbines. Any advancements in storage benefit nuclear as much as, or perhaps even more than, solar.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    13. Re: Yeah right. by Stephan+Schulz · · Score: 1

      Of course solar thermal exists. OP's point was about solar thermal storage.

      If you had taken one look at the first link, you would have found "It is the first utility-scale concentrating solar power (CSP) plant with a central receiver tower and advanced molten salt energy storage technology from SolarReserve." (emphasis mine).

      --

      Stephan

    14. Re: Yeah right. by Stephan+Schulz · · Score: 1

      Nothing is cheaper than nuclear except fossil fuels and maybe wind.

      Nonsense. No nuclear power plant has ever been economically viable when full lifecycle costs (including decommissioning and long-term waste storage) and insurance are factored in. If they look economically, it's because a) decommissioning costs are under-estimated (in a pinch, reactors are spun off into a new company that then goes broke, leaving the public with the costs), b) the problem of long-term storage is largely ignored, with some states promising some solutions some time in the future, and c) insurance is heavily subsidised and in no way represents market costs. And that does not even discuss the sunk costs of development subsidies.

      --

      Stephan

    15. Re:Yeah right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wind and solar is not even close to the best option they are considerably more expensive unless your an enviromentalist then it's cheaper because lying to get what you want is fair. It's fair game when you are a member of the death cult and live off other people's money.

    16. Re: Yeah right. by blindseer · · Score: 1

      All the same things can be said of solar.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    17. Re: Yeah right. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      All the same things can be said of solar.

      None of these things can be said of solar. Solar has no "decommissioning cost". There is no "long term storage" of waste from solar. And solar does not rely on subsidized insurance.

      The cost of solar is declining steadily. The cost of nuclear has been rising for decades.

    18. Re: Yeah right. by blindseer · · Score: 1

      The cost of solar is declining steadily. The cost of nuclear has been rising for decades.

      Sure, and the two may eventually meet in the middle somewhere. With solar energy costs being double that of nuclear it's going to take a while for solar to be cheaper than nuclear. Assuming it ever happens, nuclear should get cheaper as experience grows.

      I've become tired of the lies from solar advocates. There was a number of prominent stories about the solar waste problem on this website called "Slashdot", perhaps you've heard of it? Solar power has a waste problem far worse than nuclear. Go look up the stories, you shouldn't have to look far.

      Claiming solar power doesn't rely on subsidies is laughable. Also laughable is the decommissioning costs for solar. Again this is well documented.

      Solar power has been a money pit for a very long time. Nuclear power works if people would just let someone actually build them. Too many watched "China Syndrome" and thought it was a documentary. It's fear mongering bullshit that has nothing to do with the current state of technology.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
  5. new mac pro will be powered by hamster on wheel by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 3, Funny

    new mac pro will be powered by hamster on wheel and that what is taking so long.

    1. Re:new mac pro will be powered by hamster on wheel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Until the update that slows down your hamster.

  6. No they don't. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The claim is impossible. There was a similar article about Google last week claiming they produce from renewables as much energy as they consume. THAT is a plausible claim. What Apple is trying to say is is an outright obvious lie easily disproven by numerous examples of "apple facilities" using whatever power grid is available - such as Apple stores operating in shopping malls.

    1. Re:No they don't. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well to be honest most people know apple lies and have just come to accept that.

    2. Re: No they don't. by kenh · · Score: 1

      They buy offsets, or as the Catholic Church used to call them, indulgences.

      --
      Ken
    3. Re:No they don't. by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1
      The article says:

      Being 100% renewable does not mean that every Apple Store is powered by a solar farm, of course. Apple contributes to the power grid in even absolute amounts to what it uses. Unlike some other companies, it does not buy up REC in open market transactions to offset its dirty energy consumption skew the figures. Jackson explains

      So Apple produces as much or more energy than it uses.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    4. Re:No they don't. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      The hot air produced by their marketing department alone should be enough to power both Apple AND Google.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:No they don't. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't count manufacturing which is all/mostly 3rd party. Kind of a big energy use for a hardware company.

    6. Re:No they don't. by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      The summary says clearly: "This figure does not include Apple's third-party suppliers or manufacturers." But let's suppose Apple did manufacture their hardware. Could they? Given Apple's billions in cash and the fact that Apple predominant use of power would their massive data centers, I'd think that they could be 100% renewable.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  7. This includes Tim Cook as well by JoeyRox · · Score: 1, Troll

    The words coming out of Tim Cook's mouth are 100% renewable bullshit.

    1. Re:This includes Tim Cook as well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The words coming out of Tim Cook's mouth are 100% renewable bullshit.

      Ellison. Ballmer. Do I really need to go on to prove that Cook learned it from some of the richest assholes in the universe?

      Reality shits out countless mounds to validate how much capitalism loves bullshit artists.

    2. Re:This includes Tim Cook as well by Virtucon · · Score: 1

      mod this up please ++++

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    3. Re:This includes Tim Cook as well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      100 % agreed!

  8. So the minority has been converted to renewable by viperidaenz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The majority of their energy use - the manufacturing of their products - is still dirty old coal.

    But that's ok, because it's being burnt in China, not USA.

    1. Re:So the minority has been converted to renewable by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      So you're saying China is at fault for not conforming to the Kyoto protocol and Paris climate agreement?

      China has 85GW of solar power installed. That is far more than any other country.

      Solar power by country

    2. Re:So the minority has been converted to renewable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're saying China is at fault for not conforming to the Kyoto protocol and Paris climate agreement?

      China has 85GW of solar power installed. That is far more than any other country.

      Solar power by country

      Of total consumption is more interesting in that list. Also since it's China, 'installed' might not mean 'in use', but rather that a solar panel was installed for "prestige", but not connected anywhere. Not to mention considering their general approach to maintenance, the panels might degrade quite fast, albeit this might be different in industrial installations.

    3. Re:So the minority has been converted to renewable by blindseer · · Score: 2

      China has 85GW of solar power installed. That is far more than any other country.

      Being the most populous nation in the world I'd expect them to have the most solar power. Perhaps given their ranking as being the third largest country by area, and second largest economy, I'd expect them to be in the top 3 or perhaps top 10. The problem though is that they suck on solar power based on population.

      https://cleantechnica.com/2013...

      Rankings by solar power capacity per capita doesn't even put China in the top 20. Based on current growth they might get in the top 10 soon but can they keep growing at the current rate? Will the rest of the world also not improve their solar power deployments?

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    4. Re:So the minority has been converted to renewable by Stephan+Schulz · · Score: 1

      China[...] they suck on solar power based on population.

      Two problems: First, the source you have is from 2012. That is more than 5 years in the past, and development has been very dynamic. And secondly, China uses a lot less energy per capita than the US. If you correct for that, in 2012, the US had 4 times more solar capacity per capita, but used 3.5 times more energy per capita. In relative terms, the US is slightly ahead. But in absolute terms, the US needed to produce a lot more non-solar per capita to make up the difference in usage.

      --

      Stephan

    5. Re:So the minority has been converted to renewable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The great thing about this is CO2 doesn't give a shit where it's produced on the planet...sigh.

    6. Re:So the minority has been converted to renewable by blindseer · · Score: 1

      Two problems: First, the source you have is from 2012. That is more than 5 years in the past, and development has been very dynamic.

      More recent data still shows China lagging behind. China has about 80 GW of solar capacity as of 2016 or 2017. USA has about 40 GW, as does Germany and Japan. USA has 1/4 the population of China, Germany and Japan less than 1/10th each.

      And secondly, China uses a lot less energy per capita than the US. If you correct for that, in 2012, the US had 4 times more solar capacity per capita, but used 3.5 times more energy per capita. In relative terms, the US is slightly ahead. But in absolute terms, the US needed to produce a lot more non-solar per capita to make up the difference in usage.

      I'm not sure I should care if China uses less energy per person. We're doing really well here in the USA in large part because of the energy we consume. I'm sitting comfortably in my heated basement office as I type this, which takes energy. If we are using clean nuclear energy then the impact on the environment is quite minimal. Using natural gas means far lower impact than coal. Wind is a great source of energy out here in the Great Plains. China is far worse for the environment, on a total and per capita basis, than the USA so using less energy per person only makes them a far worse polluter than the USA.

      China is not a leader on this, even though they may possess more solar power capacity than any two nations combined. Holding them up as some kind of example is misleading or disingenuous. I'd think they should be looking towards us as an example to follow, not the other way around.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
  9. Breakdown by 110010001000 · · Score: 1, Funny

    30% solar, 10% wind, and the rest was powered by smugness.

  10. Re:Come join me in the Swamp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    lol, why are you crying?

    Is it because Trump's lawyer had a search warrant executed based on probable cause of serious recent crimes on his behalf?

  11. Re: Come join me in the Swamp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, somebody thinks that Donald Trump isn't under investigation? You want me to believe that?

    That's like the guy who told me that Trump wasn't a greedy lying fraud because of all the money he had.

    Because you know, the decades of history he has being an avaricious braggart suddenly went away, huh? Just setting foot in the White House suddenly gave him some semblance of conscience or integrity?

    The man couldn't wipe his own ass without blaming somebody else for the stink.

    He's too rich to go to jail though, he'll just die conveniently in a hot tub like Ken Lay.

  12. But not 100% on apple products by williamyf · · Score: 0

    All apple operations now run 100% in renewable energy, but not all apple operations run on apple products.

    I am 100% certain that their cloud (think iCloud, Siri, iTunes store, App Store) and administrative infrastructure (think CRM, ERP, HR, etc) do not run on Apple Servers, and does not use Apple's OS.

    But good to know at least the energy front is covered...

    (And no, I never used MacOS Server or Apple's server hardware, I am just amused at the situation).

    Witten on a MacBook Air Early 2015, with an Android Phone (KeyOne) nearby

    --
    *** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
    1. Re:But not 100% on apple products by Yaztromo · · Score: 1

      I am 100% certain that their cloud (think iCloud, Siri, iTunes store, App Store) and administrative infrastructure (think CRM, ERP, HR, etc) do not run on Apple Servers, and does not use Apple's OS.

      I suspect you were the last person on the planet to know about this.

      I doubt any long-time /. readers are surprised by this at all. Apple hasn't made a proper server since 2011, and doesn't sell or advertise macOS as a high-performance server OS (while they do still sell a "server" edition, it's more geared towards SOHO use than datacenter use).

      Apple left the server space quite some time ago. They run iCloud off a combination of Amazon AWS, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud, none of which run macOS. And this comes as a surprise to nobody at all who has paid a gram of attention over the last 8 years.

      Yaz

  13. Re: Come join me in the Swamp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My Attorney Got Arrested.

  14. Let's test that. by Virtucon · · Score: 0

    Cobalt is at over $80K/ton and is still mined by children. The Cobalt isn't renewable but the kids are, so half points.

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  15. kind of like laptop and car batteries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everyone wants to believe their used batteries will be safely disposed of. In the future you'll find out that they ended up mostly in vaguely-defined dumps located among or beneath the living spaces of the very poor, all around the world. The rest will be in the Pacific Ocean.

    As for Apple: Their offices in Ca might be 100% green, but that's chicken dung: they don't do manufacturing there, and the manufacturing is the really staggeringly inefficient part of production, as are all the elements tied to it. So you who own the phone: you don't want to look at the reality... You want your phone.

    To me its the same as with battery disposal: enough people will believe the baloney version of the story, and so long as their conscience is clear, the truth won't matter.

    In the end you'll blame some hitherto unknown alien species from the ocean floor or Mars or wherever their TV teacher tells them they invade from.

    1. Re:kind of like laptop and car batteries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only idiots think that EV batteries will be disposed of. They be used until below 50% of capacity and then recycled fully.

      No doubt that as these batteries improve, dumb fucks like you will continue sucking on Koch Bros, having their head pounded against the wall, and come up as stupid as any other GOP, believing anything that they are told by these oil stock owner.

  16. How much plastic and such in their phones? by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 0

    Unless the answer is zero, this is just feel-good nonsense. Converting their entire supply chain to all-recycled materials and all-renewable electricity isn't possible, and the closer you want to get the more the devices will cost.

    1. Re:How much plastic and such in their phones? by cashman73 · · Score: 1

      I doubt it's zero, but the body of most iPhones, and even MacBooks and Mac computers is aluminum and glass. I am sure there are some plastic components, but the bulk of the body itself is not plastic.

    2. Re:How much plastic and such in their phones? by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      Unless the answer is zero, this is just feel-good nonsense.

      Reality takes place in the gray area between your black and white. Feel free to join us when you are ready.

  17. About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I see they finally managed to harness all that hot air coming out of their marketing department.

  18. fox conn and its suppliers by WindBourne · · Score: 0

    IOW, Apple is lying through their teeth.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:fox conn and its suppliers by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      IOW, Apple is lying through their teeth.

      That's a Third Party Supplier.

      Apple doesn't OWN Foxconn, dumbass.

  19. Re: Come join me in the Swamp by kenh · · Score: 1

    Wow, did you notice that the warrant was for something unrelated to, but uncovered during, Mueller's investigation.

    Still no evidence of collusion with Russia, or are we to believe Mueller has evidence of collusion, but none of the Hillary donors working on the investigation has leaked it?

    This seems to be an investigation into trump's personal attorney giving $130K to a stripper to keep quiet - you know, kinda like how Terry McCaullif gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to Andrew McCabe's wife's campaign when she ran for office while McCabe was investigating HRC's private email server - pure coincidence, nothing more.

    --
    Ken
  20. Comments Fail by Goetterdaemmerung · · Score: 2

    What the hell /.! After 30 comments maybe one would be novel or interesting.

    This is an impressive feat to run the datacenters entirely off renewable energy.

    1. Re:Comments Fail by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      What the hell /.! After 30 comments maybe one would be novel or interesting.

      This is an impressive feat to run the datacenters entirely off renewable energy.

      VERY!

    2. Re:Comments Fail by Known+Nutter · · Score: 1

      You're reading the comments wrong.

      --
      Beware of the Leopard.
    3. Re:Comments Fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Big deal. Google did it last week. Just another example of pathetic apple just following the leader yet again.

      And apple data centers are tiny compared to real tech companies.

      But please continue to be impressed with apple.

    4. Re:Comments Fail by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      This is an impressive feat to run the datacenters entirely off renewable energy.

      No it isn't. Building a green datacentre run from renewable energy is pretty much par for the course for a long time now. Facebook, Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft etc all have been building renewable only datacentres for a while now.

      What is more difficult is retrofitting older datacentres, so forgive me for yawning at this "me too" announcement on the back of the far larger Google with its higher number of legacy projects that achieved the same milestone this week.

      If Apple want some serious praise they can start by not producing disposable devices and put some effort into not bricking devices that people dare to get repaired themselves.

      But I'm fair, I hereby present Apple with the Datacentre Environmental Participation Award. Hurray! *patts condensendingly on the head*

    5. Re:Comments Fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hateboi much? LOL.

      I bet you'd have a stroke if anyone dare question Google's environmental record when it comes to devices that they sell.

      Keep your kool-aide to yourself.

  21. Re: So the minority has been converted to renewabl by kenh · · Score: 1

    Apple has enough money to power their factories with unicorn pelts if they chose to, but they instead rely on off shore factories that run on coal...

    --
    Ken
  22. IN the long run all energy is renewable by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    In the long run, you will be fossil fuel for the cockroach civilization that emerges in geologic time.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  23. Renewable iPhones? by quonset · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Considering one has to throw out their phone or Mac after three years, or when something breaks and you can't replace the part, they're probably dumping all the broken systems into the furnace.

    An endless cycle of buy, fail, buy.

    1. Re:Renewable iPhones? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Considering one has to throw out their phone or Mac after three years, or when something breaks and you can't replace the part, they're probably dumping all the broken systems into the furnace.

      An endless cycle of buy, fail, buy.

      Sorry, Hater; but it's really more like this:

      Phone: MAYBE 3 years or so; but that's mostly because of "Ooh, shiny!", like with ALL Smartphones.

      iPad: Closer to 5 or 6 years. Again, mostly because of feature creep. IPads seem to last forever!

      Mac: Much closer to 10 years, on average. Unless you're a "Must have the new hotness" sort of person. My newest Mac (and daily driver) is a Mid 2012 MacBook Pro. Shows no signs of wear out or failure yet...

    2. Re:Renewable iPhones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look, Taylor Swift, of course your Mac shows little wear. Useless tools don't see work.

    3. Re:Renewable iPhones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He cant. Once he takes it out the the box it wont be mint any more.

    4. Re:Renewable iPhones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering one has to throw out their phone or Mac after three years, or when something breaks and you can't replace the part, they're probably dumping all the broken systems into the furnace.

      An endless cycle of buy, fail, buy.

      If you can find one not clogged with busted Windows PCs that break in a year.

    5. Re:Renewable iPhones? by blindseer · · Score: 1

      I'm typing this on a MacBook Pro that's got to be near 10 years old now. I dropped it and broke the optical drive and latch. I dropped it again, breaking the replacement optical drive. The original battery died, then I replaced it, and the replacement died. It now sits on my desk because I got tired of buying batteries. No one makes a replacement as good as the original.

      I bought a new MacBook Pro a few months ago, we'll see if I can avoid dropping this one and breaking something. The one thing that concerns me is the battery. The technology on batteries improved considerably, if the battery lasts ten years then I'll keep carrying that laptop. Even then with USB-C power bricks being a thing now, and Apple dropping MagSafe for USB-C, I can expect to be able to find power for this new MacBook Pro in 10 years. I got a USB-C power cord with a magnetic breakaway connector so I could get my MagSafe back.

      My phones have lasted about 5 years, I'd guess, except my last one. That one went through the wash from leaving it in my jeans pocket. Previous ones were worn out or so old my provider PAID ME to upgrade.

      I don't have an iPad but my iPods lasted a very long time. Like most of my electronics they are used until I break them. My last iPod Touch was about 6 years old went it met a concrete floor from a 5 foot drop, putting cracks in the screen. It still works but the touch screen is difficult to read and doesn't track finger movements well. I still use it once in a while.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    6. Re:Renewable iPhones? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Exactly!

      BTW, how do you like that aftermarket Mag-Safe thingy?

    7. Re:Renewable iPhones? by blindseer · · Score: 1

      The MagSafe work-alike I have came from Griffin Technology and works about as well as the old MagSafe connector from Apple. Like MagSafe it comes loose a bit too easily, which can be annoying. Unlike MagSafe it's orientation dependent, the magnetic connection can't be flipped over if there's some twisting tension that can make the connection come loose. This is easily addressed though by flipping over the USB-C connector. It's a "dumb" cable and so is limited to 60 watts like any passive USB-C cable, but that's not a big deal either. If I had a laptop that needed more power then this might be an issue. Sounds like 100 watt capable cables like it will be offered soon, by both Griffin and competitors. It provides no data connection, which I consider a good thing now that I hear of power supplies that try to grab data from laptops, it passes power only and so offers protection from such things.

      In short, I'd recommend it.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    8. Re:Renewable iPhones? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 0

      Cool, thanks!

  24. Re: Come join me in the Swamp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, Donald Trump is right, remember he spent years barking about Obama's birth certificate, which his investigators really found amazing stuff according to what the Great Orange Turd said on the Twittering.

    Now that's the real crime, you know it's true. He said as much.

  25. Creative definition of "run on renewables" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As noted in the article this doesn't mean that they've cut their connection to fossil fuel power plants, only that overall they produce an equal amount of renewable energy through various contracts/facilities as they use. They still rely heavily on fossil fuels. I'll be a bit more impressed when their facilities have hefty battery packs and energy from the grid flows into the site only a few weeks out of the year.

    1. Re:Creative definition of "run on renewables" by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      As noted in the article this doesn't mean that they've cut their connection to fossil fuel power plants, only that overall they produce an equal amount of renewable energy through various contracts/facilities as they use. They still rely heavily on fossil fuels. I'll be a bit more impressed when their facilities have hefty battery packs and energy from the grid flows into the site only a few weeks out of the year.

      FYI, the Mothership requires NO HVAC for 9 months out of the year. So, it isn't ALL just fancy energy-accounting.

    2. Re:Creative definition of "run on renewables" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what percent you think is fancy energy-accounting and what percent is plain bullshit?

  26. Re:Sure, when you have 1 million chinamen by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    No, I just think he's including Hoover Dam as a source.

  27. Re: So the minority has been converted to renewab by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And how much would you complain if the price of a phone jumped to accommodate your idea?

  28. Exclusions by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

    "This figure does not include Apple's third-party suppliers or manufacturers".

    That's like saying Facebook runs on renewables, except for its data centres.

  29. Did you get your 50c by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple is lying through its teeth, or, Apple are lying through their teeth.

    Isn't English fun.

  30. Bullshit, iCloud runs off Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And Google isn't using 100% renewable energy.

  31. ALL Retail stores? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Not the one in my mall. Nope. Not a single solar panel on the roof of that place, and the local utility is gas/coal fired.

    1. Re:ALL Retail stores? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My guess is that they are probably offsetting. It's like punching someone in the face and then paying someone else not to punch people in the face.

  32. Re: So the minority has been converted to renewab by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you dont like the price of apple crap dont buy it. No one is forcing you to.

  33. Except for plane trips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple runs 100% on renewable energy, except for plane trips that their executives take. Whoever wrote this Slashdot article has to list all the exceptions to their claim of 100% renewable energy. Nicely done, Slashdot!

    1. Re: Except for plane trips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Undoubtedly there are container ships, that carry Apple products all over the world. Container ships are known to be huge consumers of fossil fuels and polluters of the atmosphere. There is one more exception to the claim that Apple runs 100% on renewable energy.

  34. Impossible! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I keep reading that we need mountains of government regulations, thousands of bureaucrats, and government-driven artificially-inflated prices on fossil fuels to force us to switch to renewables. Large numbers of university professors insist that the free market will never do such a thing, and thus we need the velvet-wrapped iron fist of a benevolent globalist government engaged in Marxist redistributionist policies to force us to do ehat's in our best interest but which we are too stupid to do on our own.

    America's founders held that people, left to their own with freedom, would eventually do the right thing and do it better than any government.

    Our current self-appointed elites, on the other hand, tell us we are too short-sighted and ignorant and need to be ruled by out betters (generally THEM).

    Funny therefore that Tim Cook, who helms the Apple that is bragging about this, is one of those self-appoinyed elites who generally thinks such things will never happen without government mandates.

    1. Re: Impossible! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I keep reading that we need mountains of government regulations, thousands of bureaucrats, and government-driven artificially-inflated prices on fossil fuels to force us to switch to renewables."

      We need mountains of government regulations, thousands of bureaucrats, and government-driven artificially-inflated prices on fossil fuels to force us to feed the oil companies and keep their lobbies running in Congress

  35. Re: So the minority has been converted to renewabl by inking · · Score: 1

    I like how people always asset that someone else has "enough money to do XYZ".

  36. Re: So the minority has been converted to renewabl by blindseer · · Score: 1

    Apple has enough money to power their factories with unicorn pelts if they chose to, but they instead rely on off shore factories that run on coal...

    Here's something most people seem to be ignorant about, China has a near monopoly on rare earth elements and they use this to force manufacturing to their country. They won't export rare earth elements as anything but a finished product. If you want to make a LCD display then it will most likely have to be done in a factory in China, because getting these elements any other way is near impossible under current US federal laws.

    Why is it like this? Because most of the world complies with international rules on the production of nuclear weapons. What does nuclear weapons have to do with LCD screens? Elements like thorium and uranium are abundant in the same places where rare earth elements are abundant. If people mine rare earth elements then they will produce thorium and uranium along with it. Since most nations comply with the rules restricting the production of thorium and uranium (either due to treaties or self imposed laws) the production of rare earth elements are confined to the nations that don't much care about producing thorium and uranium. China produces a lot of thorium and they just put it on huge piles until they figure out what to do with it. Given that thorium is not soluble in water, doesn't really blow away in the wind, or pose any real biological hazard there is nothing wrong with this. The uranium is used to fuel nuclear power reactors and make weapons.

    Rare earth elements aren't that rare but we can't produce them in any meaningful quantity in the USA because the rules on digging up uranium and thorium make it real expensive. There are rules on how to handle uranium and thorium that are total nonsense, because just having an ore is a long way from making any weapons. If there was a market for this uranium and thorium in the USA, such as nuclear power reactors, then we'd see some rare earth elements being mined here too.

    I don't like Apple making their products in China either. I found out why they do it. It's because the USA has stupid laws on the mining of thorium and uranium, and China takes advantage of this by not exporting the materials except in finished products. People can't just dig up the rare earth elements and put the other stuff back in the hole it came from, because just digging it up is considered "producing weapons grade material". Fix that stupid law, or create a market for the uranium and thorium in nuclear power, and we'll get our iPhones with "Made in USA" on the back.

    China corners the markets on electronics because WE ALLOWED THEM TO DO SO with our own laws. Don't blame Apple, and don't blame China, this came from our own federal government.

    --
    I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
  37. 100% of their data scientists work for marketing by uulbri · · Score: 1

    I suspect that maybe they produce globally as much energy as they consume, which is not exactly the same thing as being "green"...

    Living in France, I can already tell you that there is no way their stores in France can be powered by anything else but nuclear plants !

  38. But the keep releasing new phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They keep making their phones obsolete instead of making them up-gradable. So tonnes of apple materials are going to land fills.

  39. Facts For The Fucknut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear Fucknut:

    My region has ONE single electric supplier that relies on coal and natural gas to run its generators. There is no other source of electricity, save for a paltry roof-top solar option.

    Apple has at least three stores in the area and none of them have solar panels. None. This greenwashing claim of 100% renewable energy use is patently false.

  40. Re: Come join me in the Swamp by wes33 · · Score: 2

    some less fantasy filled context here:

    http://www.politifact.com/trut...

  41. I'm not impressed by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 1

    If they hooked a generator up to Steve Jobs' corpse they could power half of California.

  42. Ummmm fake news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Unless Apple's sites are 100% off the grid this is not achievable, PERIOD. They would have to put in their own separate transmission grid and renewable energy infrastructure which has not happened, so this is a bazillion percent false.

  43. BULL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just came from an Apple store and they are still using the grid.

  44. Re: Come join me in the Swamp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mueller literally has told him that he is a subject in the investigation. He isn't a TARGET at this point, but he IS a subject.

    I think it's funny you don't know this.

  45. Fancy that! Running an isolated power-grid! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Or they don't know how electricity works... not sure which it is.

  46. Re: Come join me in the Swamp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you honestly think, with the events like the uncovering of the HIGHLY BIASED FBI agent Peter Strzok that there was NO quid pro quo for the events AT ALL?????

    You must be stupid, naive of all of the above.

  47. Re:Come join me in the Swamp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did i click the wrong title here a thought this was about apple? Every page you RAGE about Trump going to jail well why are you here?
    If your dreams are coming true why are you here RAGING fuck off everything will be perfect when you get another career criminal/politician in office so again i ask why are you here RAGING?

  48. Re: Come join me in the Swamp by zieroh · · Score: 1

    Mmmm, tasty tasty nothingburger.

    A no-knock search warrant on the personal lawyer of a sitting president is as far from a nothingburger as you can get. This is now officially a Very Big Deal.

    --
    People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
  49. Re: Come join me in the Swamp by farble1670 · · Score: 1

    This seems to be an investigation into trump's personal attorney giving $130K to a stripper to keep quiet - you know, kinda like how Terry McCaullif gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to Andrew McCabe's wife's campaign when she ran for office while McCabe was investigating HRC's private email server - pure coincidence, nothing more.

    Hello Russian troll, we aren't listening anymore. These "what about ... !!!" posts are so tired and pointless. I know, your point is to goad people into some pointless discussion where you throw trigger words at them, with the end goal of upsetting people and sowing division. It's not working anymore. Come up with some new tactics.

  50. Foxconn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about foxconn factories in China..all apple products are manufactured there