Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Invests in Three Wind Farms in China as Part of Renewable Energy Efforts
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Because it's a waste of money, Go to Palm Springs.. almost half are broke because it's too expensive to repair. They've become eye sores and they build more that they will never fix.
They aren’t running because the production capacity isn’t needed at that moment. Renewables (in the US at least) are still typically only a supplementary power source. Energy distribution isn’t as simple as you’re assuming it to be. What you should be asking is: why aren’t there running? 9 times out of 10 there’s an answer a lot different than your assumption.
They were installed in the 80s so yeah, maintenance is needed and is being performed.
Things are so bad they’re investing in more capacity! https://www.desertsun.com/story/tec...d-farms-could-change-dramatically/1578515002/
Last edited:
The new HQ is 100% renewable energy. Their panels could be giving back to the grid as well. Either way it is a start in state that has a lot of renewable energy solutions going on already.
Very true. Nuclear poses no high risks both short and long term and has a 100% safety track record. Long term storage of nuclear waste has been solved. Radiation poses no risk to people and animals. I’m shocked Apple didn’t decide to invest in nuclear instead.
This is for the planet though. You have to put the solutions in areas that impact the planet the most.
Except that ANY change to the plant to reduce emissions, immediately cleans up all those cars that charge from its output (by proxy). Easier to control a centralized emissions location than 10s of thousands of individual emissions sources.
Internal combustion engines have become much better due to EFI and better catalytic converters, but they still produce emissions on an individual and distributed basis. Some more than others.
Aside from that, there are many other benefits to driving electric that I enjoy. Lack of certain fluids required, lack of mechanical brake wear due to regenerative braking, pre-conditioning the cabin while plugged in without idling an internal combustion engine, etc. And, the acceleration is nothing short of breath taking if you choose to push it.
They are also 30 years old. That is about their max lifespan. They’re also old models and aren’t as productive or efficient as newer ones. Apparently an economic decision was made that there was more benefit to replace. Not all that complicated. Not ideal from an environmental standpoint, but no infrastructure lasts forever. Newer models have longer expected lifespans.
Or maybe that is a crazy old wind farm from the 80s and owners of those turbines are slowly replacing them with modern ones.
It's almost like newer technology might be even better than old tech?
Apple is a corporate enterprise. They can choose where and how to invest money and technology. They also invest a lot in the U.S. already. They don't do it because it's "good for us" but because it's good for them. The obligation to invest in our society rests squarely on us as individuals and on our government.
It's troubling to see that our expectations are the way they are. Corporations are truly taking over the governance of our Republic and it's a problem. I'm not saying either one of you said something wrong. Not at all. It's just thought-provoking.
"Wind: Between 140,000 and 328,000 birds a year in the contiguous United States, according to a December 2013 study published in the journal Biological Conservation. Taller turbines tend to take out more birds.
Oil and Gas: An estimated 500,000 to 1 million birds a year are killed in oil fields, the Bureau of Land Management said in a December 2012 memo.
Coal: Huge numbers of birds, roughly 7.9 million, may be killed by coal, according to analysis by Benjamin K. Sovacool, director of the Danish Center for Energy Technologies. His estimate, however, included everything from mining to production and climate change, which together amounted to about five birds per gigawatt-hour of energy generated by coal.
Nuclear: About 330,000 birds, by Sovacool’s calculations.
Power Lines: Between 12 and 64 million birds a year are felled by transmission lines, according to a study published July 3 in the journal PLOS ONE."
If wind and solar replace natural gas and coal then I think it would drastically improve bird populations.
China is doing way more than we are on climate change.
I have personally seen what the Chinese government is implementing. They are shutting down many steel plants, electroplating plants, and other high pollution facilities, and while they still build coal mines to meet demand, they are moving toward renewables at an amazing pace. I drove past a large solar field and a nuclear plant on the way from Shanghai to Hangzhou. I don't remember either one being there even a few years ago.
Manufacturing has also improved. Americans have so many misconceptions about China's manufacturing. The reality is that most factories are cleaner than Walmart these days and only getting better -- largely driven by government policy.
India has a way to go, no doubt. Try to see it from their perspective. America and the western world got to burn fossil fuel to usher in industrial evolution, which transitioned into a robust and very productive service economy. Now the same beneficiaries of the fossil-based energy are telling India to take a different path. Renewables are expensive and require massive capital investment, but the western world is not offering much support. Still, they did join the Paris Accord and guess what, they are developing renewables and building a sustainable grid from the start.
There is only ONE country in the world that has pulled out of the Paris accord -- That's us. Climate change is an existential crisis, but if Apple were to lobby anyone, it would be the United States Congress and this administration.
We really need to stop telling the world what to do and just lead by example... Just my opinion.
That's all a bit hyperbolic, no?
No form of energy production has a 100% safety record. There's close to 450 active nuclear plants in the world today, and most don't have accidents. And if we're talking Three Mile Island-Chernobyl-Fukushima style accidents (e.g. meltdowns), those are comparatively rare. Nuclear got a bad rap due to those events, but it continues to be one of the best forms of energy production despite the radioactive waste (which can be dealt with in an environmentally responsible way).
This^^^^
I am an avid outdoorsman. I am very much for a clean environment and efficient, clean energy. Wind farms are not the way to do it. Wind farms provide a tiny fraction of the energy needed, take up an incredible amount of space, are a blight to our vistas and mountain tops, kill birds, raptors, and bats, and are rusting hulks once they outlive their usefulness (wind turbines are not removed after they fail, but merely are left derelict). There have been studies that have even shown their micro-climate impact that they have surrounding large installed footprints (energy is not free, when you remove it from anything, there is a loss -- including from our own localized climates near these farms).
Too many love to fantasize of wind when considering clean energy -- without taking the added step of logic.
You define a risk both through probability and impact. The probability of a nuclear incident might be low, but the impact is HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE. I cannot even emphasize how massive the impact has the potential to be.
Nuclear gets a bad rap because it is DANGEROUS. Extremely dangerous to humanity and the planet.
I suggest you share these environmentally responsible ways to deal with long term radioactive waste. Policy makers and scientists have yet to figure it out - so I think your ideas will be very welcome!
[automerge]1569340043[/automerge]
Yes, Apple and other investors are just totally void of logic and have done no analysis on the topic. YOU have it all figured out though.
Awesome. Now lets get delivery vehicles electric-powered so that all those iPhones people buy don't add pollution.
Apple is okay killing birds in other parts of the World, but not in their back yard? Hmmmm. Okay.
I'm loving this caricature of wind turbines as specifically engineered, perfectly efficient and ruthless avian killing machines.
Not anywhere near unprecedented. Buildings and cats kill cats at unprecedented levels. So unless you keep your cat indoors and you live underground, you have killed lots of birds too.
Yes, Apple and other investors are just totally void of logic and have done no analysis on the topic. YOU have it all figured out though.
You're right. My nearly 30 years working in the clean energy and smart grid sector, professionally advocating for new, clean technologies for several well-known environmental organizations, standards, and advocacy groups don't qualify me nor my opinion on this topic...
Back at you with the eye-roll
