New aerial images of Apple's planned NC fuel cell, solar farms emerge

135678

Comments

  • lightstrikerlightstriker Posts: 458member
    Spy photo journalism. This is what Wired has become? Pavarazzi to Apple's celebrity. Taking aerial and guessing what it is.
  • prof. peabodyprof. peabody Posts: 2,860member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by CGJ View Post


    ... I still fully support nuclear energy. ... Japanese government were just stupid to place such a facility in a zone near an earthquake zone. whereas in Britain, the biggest earthquakes we get are 2.7 on the Richter scale.



    I find this to be an unnecessarily offensive remark that makes little sense.



    All of Japan is an earthquake zone.

    This doesn't make all the Japanese people automatically "stupid" for using nuclear.
  • prof. peabodyprof. peabody Posts: 2,860member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tcasey View Post


    You should tell the people in japan that nuclear power is the cleanest power around..its strange the govt. has closed down all nuclear power plants and are now looking for new sources of power, that does not require perm destroying japan and wipe out its people.



    This is just lies and nonsense.



    Not only is this not true (the government's reaction), but it implies the existence of a huge problem with nuclear power in Japan that also simply doesn't exist.



    Please resume watching FOX.
  • eideardeideard Posts: 291member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post


    Well let's hope they got some great deals on those solar panels during the auctioning off of Solyndra, that, along with the purchase of a few Chevy Volts to traverse the complex ought to make it the greenest fuel cell, solar farm in NC... Well, except for all the missing green trees, shrubs, and grass... </facetious>

    /

    /

    /



    Does your pastor assign you to make these sillyass remarks - or the kool aid party?
  • sacto joesacto joe Posts: 604member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    This is just lies and nonsense.



    Not only is this not true (the government's reaction), but it implies the existence of a huge problem with nuclear power in Japan that also simply doesn't exist.



    Please resume watching FOX.



    Do you have even the slightest appreciation of how close Japan came to an unmitigated disaster that would have permanently destroyed not only their country but much, much more, including large swathes of the west coast of the North and South American continents? There were six China Syndromes that nearly came into being. Six! Why? Because even one of those going China Syndrome would have knocked out the cooling systems for the other five!



    And don't pull that "Fox News" crap either. Just because some right wingers have pulled the wool over the eyes on some weak intellects on the left, that doesn't mean we're all susceptible. Nuclear has huge problems. Japan proved that beyond even the shadow of a doubt. And any environmentalist with half a brain knows that.
  • jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    The appropriate opportunity cost of capital to benchmark this - or any other - project is not the return on cash.



    While that's normally true of most companies, it's not really the case for Apple. They have mountains of cash sitting around and they are not in a position where they have to choose between alternatives.
  • prof. peabodyprof. peabody Posts: 2,860member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Sacto Joe View Post


    Do you have even the slightest appreciation of how close Japan came to an unmitigated disaster that would have permanently destroyed not only their country but much, much more, including large swathes of the west coast of the North and South American continents? ....



    Sorry and no offence, but if you actually believe this junk you need to see a doctor.



    Everything you say here is either completely false or wildly, (emphasis on the "wildly"), exaggerated. I'm not going to spend the time arguing it with you as it would be pointless.



    Edit: I thought you were the same person on the first post since you replied to my reply. To be clear, the first person's post is completely inaccurate and just full of made up stuff. The second post here is more like 95% wild, wild, wild, exaggerations with just a soupçon of lies.
  • mightymikemightymike Posts: 49member
    Apple's datacenter must be up and running as close to 100% of the time as possible. Apple can't rely on Amazon's servers for this. The only other option is to build your own and diversify your energy source to the extent possible.



    It's a business decision to have an upfront cost for downstream reliability. If people perceive that Apple is reliable then it will payoff with more customers down the line, including corporations and at the state and federal level.
  • lmgslmgs Posts: 63member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    What the country needs is diversication into alternate sources of nuclear power. The unfortunate reality is that almost every single research dollar for future nuclear systems goes into one system. A system by the way that has seen little success in the last 25 years or so. Instead we need to get the government to fund a diversity of possible paths to new nuclear energy systems.



    Wow, more government spending on energy??? Did we learn nothing from Solyndra'??



    2.7 Billion down the rat hole, so far...

    http://forums.charlotteobserver.com/?q=node/15715



    Let the private sector invest in energy that works.. About the only thing the government is good at is throwing $850,000 parties in Vegas...
  • lmgslmgs Posts: 63member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacQuest View Post


    It probably will not only be tornado proof, but will be a tornado maker as well!



    Nothing above ground is Tornado proof.. But they don't have that many in NC..
  • solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by LMGS View Post


    Nothing above ground is Tornado proof.. But they don't have that many in NC..



    I'm sure tornados don't reach into the stratosphere. We need an iCloud city.
  • mechanicmechanic Posts: 803member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ascii View Post


    How much more will it cost to maintain all those solar cells and biogas than just buy some mass produced energy from the local power company? One of these days all these little extra expenses are going to add up and Apple will find themselves unable to compete.



    Apparently Apple has written agreement to sell the local electric company the electricity generated by this to help them meet there green power requirements and that would help offset the cost of the maintenance and up keep of these two plants.
  • cgjcgj Posts: 276member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    This doesn't make all the Japanese people automatically "stupid" for using nuclear.



    I never said the Japanese people were stupid.
  • anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 17,187member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    While that's normally true of most companies, it's not really the case for Apple. They have mountains of cash sitting around and they are not in a position where they have to choose between alternatives.



    That statement is wrong, with all due respect. While 'cash' is generally worth cash when it's sitting around, the only true measure of the opportunity cost of cash when it used for something -- anything -- is the cost of capital, regardless of the amount that is sitting around. The actual cost of capital of a particular investment will, in turn, depend on the returns you can get on risk-equivalent investments elsewhere.



    I didn't write the rules of finance.



    In this particular case, however, the cost of capital may be tough to measure, since there are aspects to this investment that go far beyond just the purchase price of grid-delivered electricity foregone. It is, however, not what the cash currently earns.



    That's about all I wish to say about it. Have no interest in getting into an argument over this!
  • anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 17,187member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Sacto Joe View Post


    Do you have even the slightest appreciation of how close Japan came to an unmitigated disaster that would have permanently destroyed not only their country but much, much more, including large swathes of the west coast of the North and South American continents? There were six China Syndromes that nearly came into being. Six! Why? Because even one of those going China Syndrome would have knocked out the cooling systems for the other five!



    And don't pull that "Fox News" crap either. Just because some right wingers have pulled the wool over the eyes on some weak intellects on the left, that doesn't mean we're all susceptible. Nuclear has huge problems. Japan proved that beyond even the shadow of a doubt. And any environmentalist with half a brain knows that.



    Actually, you're the one that needs to read up more about this. The failures were fundamentally man-made, resulting from a long chain of poor decisions. It was a very poorly maintained plant, and all kinds corners were cut over the past few decades. Then they tried to hide these fact, and blamed it all on the earthquake and tsunami (the preparations for which, it also turns out, were woefully lacking). There is a ton of evidence out there if you want to look.



    And the fact that it is a first-generation nuclear power plant just made it worse. It's like a car built in the early 70s that is still on the road -- think about how far the technologies have come since then.



    Today's nuclear reactor technologies --3rd generation -- are remarkably safe. That is simply a fact. Fourth generation reactor technologies coming on stream are even more so.
  • anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 17,187member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by LMGS View Post


    Wow, more government spending on energy??? Did we learn nothing from Solyndra'??



    2.7 Billion down the rat hole, so far...

    http://forums.charlotteobserver.com/?q=node/15715



    Let the private sector invest in energy that works.. About the only thing the government is good at is throwing $850,000 parties in Vegas...



    You're exaggerating the role of the government based on a handful of investments -- in a long list -- made by the DoE.



    You're also exaggerating the role of the private sector. The experience of the US private sector in solar has been worse in the past 18 months. Chinese manufacturers have been cleaning their clocks. IOW, the private sector was as flatfooted, if not worse, in investing in "energy that works."



    About those parties.... unfortunately, the 'private sector' has been an equal opportunity offender -- while we're at anecdotes, remember Dennis Kozlowski's multimillion dollar toga birthday parties?
  • jonoromjonorom Posts: 293member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    The problem can be clearly bee seen in the waste of land in these photos. Solar electric has its uses as supplemental power if incorporated into a acolytes structure. Here we see over a hundred acres wasted for a facility that will never cover all of the facilities energy need. That is an incredibly sad sight to see.



    In a nut shell the mad rush to solar electric will result in far more environmental damage than any other source of so called green energy. This is the problem amply demonstrated by the arial photos. Frankly it is far more damaging than strip mining as at least the land can be turned back to nature after resources extraction.



    I'm all for better sources of energy but covering the planet in solar electric plants is one hedious thought.



    It is tough to see dozens of acres of farmland consumed for the largest non-utility solar installation in the country. But let's not overreact. Consider oil shale, or strip mining for coal, or even hydroelectric (Lake Powell drowning Glen Canyon, anyone?). These technologies destroy thousands of times the acreage of solar. And, unlike solar, the damage of coal and oil shale extraction extend far beyond simple land use.



    It is preferable (though not ideal) to locate solar plants in desert areas, which are both sunny and less rich as habitats (although also precious). The Desertec Foundation calculates that ALL of Europe's electricity could be generated by solar located on less than 1% of the Sahara (see http://www.desertec.org/en/global-mission/ ). And the work on this project is now underway. We need to do the same in the USA.
  • wizard69wizard69 Posts: 11,753member
    The last thing we need to do is to turn this into a political discussion but the references in this case where valid and signify the corruption and ethical problems in the solar electric industry. Frankly the Obama administration isn't the only one to get suckered by these guys, they just fell big time.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Eideard View Post


    Does your pastor assign you to make these sillyass remarks - or the kool aid party?



  • jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    That statement is wrong, with all due respect. While 'cash' is generally worth cash when it's sitting around, the only true measure of the opportunity cost of cash when it used for something -- anything -- is the cost of capital, regardless of the amount that is sitting around. The actual cost of capital of a particular investment will, in turn, depend on the returns you can get on risk-equivalent investments elsewhere.



    I didn't write the rules of finance.



    Obviously not - you're too busy misunderstanding them.



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost

    Opportunity cost: "In decision making, Opportunity Cost is the difference between the net value of the path which was chosen and the net value of the best alternative which was not chosen."



    Apple has $100 billion sitting around doing essentially nothing. They have more than they need for any possible acquisitions or investment in the business. Therefore, the best alternative is either to let it sit in a 1% return investment or distribute it to shareholders. Either way, the alternative is to earn 1% interest or to give it to the shareholders - which means a zero percent return.



    A typical solar installation, the payback period is around 10-20 years, so there's a 5-10% annual return (assuming no energy price increase).
  • anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 17,187member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    Obviously not - you're too busy misunderstanding them.



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost

    Opportunity cost: "In decision making, Opportunity Cost is the difference between the net value of the path which was chosen and the net value of the best alternative which was not chosen."



    See sentence 4: http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/site...iew0/chapter2/ from Brealey & Meyers (which, btw, is likely the most widely used finance textbook in the world).



    It's a summary from Chapter 2. Not one of the advanced chapters.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    A typical solar installation, the payback period is around 10-20 years, so there's a 5-10% annual return (assuming no energy price increase).



    Actually, payback and expected return depends on the scale (capacity), location, and whether it's PV or CSP. There is no "typical."
Sign In or Register to comment.