or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple says working toward 'net zero energy' and green products in Environmental Responsibility Report
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple says working toward 'net zero energy' and green products in Environmental Responsibility...

post #1 of 71
Thread Starter 
Apple on Wednesday published an Environmental Responsibility Report covering fiscal 2014, outlining steps the company has taken to reduce impact on climate change, use green materials in its products and conserve resources.


Apple's Maiden, N.C. solar farm. | Source: Apple


As noted in the document (PDF link) posted to the company's updated Environmental Responsibility webpage, Apple placed high priority on three key areas in 2013: reducing impact on climate change by using renewable energy sources and driving energy efficiency in its products; pioneering the use of greener materials in products and processes; and conserving precious resources.

A large chunk of Apple's environmental efforts are spent on achieving "net zero energy," which involves efficient energy use, generation of energy using renewable resources and purchasing renewable energy from appropriate providers.

More than 140 Apple Stores in the U.S. -- and all 21 Australian locations -- are now running off 100 percent renewable energy.The iCloud data center in Maiden, N.C. is used as an example of this net zero philosophy. With the nation's largest privately-owned solar array generating anywhere from 60 percent to 100 percent of daily energy requirements, and remaining needs purchased in the form of biogas, Maiden is 100 percent renewable. The solar array itself produces 167 million kilowatt-hours of renewable energy onsite per year, enough to power 13,837 homes.

A report on Tuesday revealed the company is planning to build a third solar array near the Maiden property, a move that may be intended to cope with future expansions to the data center. The company already purchased 200-acres of land nearby to build out a second solar array.

Under new Environemental Initiative chief Lisa Jackson, Apple has also been able to convert more than 140 U.S. Apple Stores, as well as all 21 Australian stores, to 100 percent renewable energy. To achieve this feat, Apple either purchases green energy from a third-party provider or participates in utility green tariff programs that ensure electricity comes from a renewable energy source.

The upcoming Apple Campus 2, which was designed from the ground up to be environmentally friendly, was also brought into focus. Apple says the campus will be powered by 100 percent renewable energy with one of the largest corporate solar energy installations in the world, while advanced architecture allows air to flow through specially designed vents to cut down on HVAC costs.


Late Apple cofounder Steve Jobs inspecting a model of Campus 2's specially designed free-flow venting system.


In addition to large-scale thinking, Apple also looks at the details and will have more than 1,000 shared bicycles available to Campus 2 employees. Other transport measures include ride sharing, carpooling and incentives to use eco-friendly forms of transportation.

Apple also addresses shuttle buses, a hot topic for many Bay Area residents who feel San Francisco is being gentrified by high-salary tech workers. For some critics, the coaches have become symbols of economic inequality.

For its part, Apple says that more than 2,100 employees use the free, biodiesel-powered buses per day to commute from corporate offices in Cupertino and Sunnyvale, Calif., avoiding 6,377 metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions. In addition, the company promotes ride sharing and provides more than 300 charging points for electric cars.

On the topic of efficient product design, Apple points to energy saving features built into OS X and iOS, saying that the average total power consumed by its devices are 57 percent less than they were in 2008. The company also points out continuing efforts to shrink packaging size to cut down on material waste and transportation costs.


Source: Apple


In addition to the energy going into making and using Apple products, the company is also working on post-use scenarios through recycling programs. By partnering with local recyclers, Apple avoids transporting material to out-of-region plants, thus saving on greenhouse emission costs.

On the efficacy of its recycling initiative, Apple's Jackson said in May that -- by weight -- incoming material accounts for "well over 80 percent" of product the company put out seven years ago. With the decreasing size of devices like the iPhone and Mac, that statistic suggests a good incoming mix, she said.

The entire 29-page report can be viewed on Apple's Environmental Responsibility website.
post #2 of 71
I find it quite ironic, that going into an article such as this regarding renewable energy and green energy, gives me the Google ad banner at the top that it did...
post #3 of 71
I wonder if they are going to take into account all the other energy costs in sourcing of 3rd-party components to 3rd-party manufacturing to 3rd-party shipping. If they are creating a surplus at their farms I suppose that wouldn't be a difficult goal to achieve if they can get the other.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #4 of 71
Every government building should have solar roofing. Drive the price down when competition meets demand then popularize it in the private sector. Just me ranting...
post #5 of 71
Yeah, Ad Sense is serving up ads about energy saving products in this article.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #6 of 71

Great job Apple, you have always stayed the course on good environmental stewardship!!  I don't buy into the Global Warming Climate Change (supported equally by  Warming or Cooling, Droughting or Flooding), but I do believe in stewardship. 

 

Apple could make a much bigger impact on the Global environment if they improved solar cells of greater efficiency (high end consumer is 27%) so the whole world could easily and affordably use renewable energy. 

 

Kudos Apple! 

post #7 of 71
Apple proves there is a business case to invest in green energy.
post #8 of 71

I'm not too interested in liberal green policies, global warming scams, or whatever they're calling it today, I think the latest meme is climate change, but I'm very happy with solar stocks, and I've been trading some of them this year, like SCTY and FSLR. They have some nice action going on, both up and down.

post #9 of 71
Originally Posted by AjbDtc826 View Post
Every government building should have solar roofing.

 

Well… no. Not at all.


Every government building should use American power.

post #10 of 71
Keep in mind that 'energy neutral', 'carbon neutral', etc. is not the same as "cheaper" or without great cost.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #11 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Well… no. Not at all.


Every government building should use American power.

 

Seriously, why do something good for economics and the environment, when you can just be a jingoistic prick.  Burn some good 'Merican coal there...

OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
post #12 of 71
Originally Posted by shen View Post

Seriously, why do something good for economics and the environment, when you can just be a jingoistic prick.  Burn some good ‘Merican coal there...

 

That’s the most strawmen I’ve seen in a post in a while. Why not try again when you’re capable of reading first?

post #13 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 

I'm not too interested in liberal green policies, global warming scams, or whatever they're calling it today, I think the latest meme is climate change, but I'm very happy with solar stocks, and I've been trading some of them this year, like SCTY and FSLR. They have some nice action going on, both up and down.

 

Good point, why trust an overwhelming majority of climate scientists about some warming scam when a plucky under funded group of oil billionaires has exposed the evil government plot to stop invading the middle east for energy...

OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
post #14 of 71

I don't suppose you care to explain what is "straw man" that.  Or did you just hear the term and thought you would try it out?

OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
post #15 of 71
Originally Posted by shen View Post

an overwhelming majority of climate scientists

 

*cough*/*cough*

 

Take a step back before replying in yet another thread.

post #16 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

*cough*/*cough*

 

Take a step back before replying in yet another thread.

 

I am well aware of what they are.  You are failing to explain how my suggesting that your stance is jingoistic is a straw man.  Try again.

OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
post #17 of 71
Originally Posted by shen View Post

I am well aware of what they are.  You are failing to explain how my suggesting that your stance is jingoistic is a straw man.  Try again.

 

Why not reply where it belongs instead? Actually, why not just not make up things that other people didn’t say? Sounds like a better idea.

post #18 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

*cough*/*cough*

 

Take a step back before replying in yet another thread.

 

BTW, stating that a majority of climate scientists have come by scientific consensus to a conclusion, is not the same as "popularity" unless you fail to understand what the scientific method is.  Nor is it an appeal to authority, but a suggestion that expertise has weight.  

 

You don't, or at least I hope you wouldn't, go to a plumber to fix a cavity.  Expertise matters.

 

And generally speaking, if 97/100 doctors state that you are risk for a heart attack, if you claim that is an appeal to popularity, we can just shake our heads at your ignorance and wait for the cardiac arrest.

 

Why is the climate any different?

OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
post #19 of 71
Originally Posted by shen View Post

Why is the climate any different?


Just seems to me that you could show some actual proof to him to tear his argument apart instead of repeating tag lines.

 

You know, since the doctors would be able to show me proof of heart attack, after all.

post #20 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

Actually, why not just not make up things that other people didn’t say? Sounds like a better idea.

 

I agree.  So when you state that something is a straw man without proof, how about you realize that is just making things up?

 

Back to the topic, how much more "American" would you like government power to be than made right there on the roof of that American building?  Is the sun too foreign for you?

OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
post #21 of 71
Originally Posted by shen View Post

So when you state that something is a straw man without proof

 

Read my post. Read your post. There’s your proof. This isn’t a difficult concept to grasp. 

post #22 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 


Just seems to me that you could show some actual proof to him to tear his argument apart instead of repeating tag lines.

 

You know, since the doctors would be able to show me proof of heart attack, after all.

 

Seems to me that if you live in this day and age and haven't been exposed to that proof already, you are willfully ignorant.  

 

Which you are proving yourself to be.

 

But hey, since you are special... http://letmegooglethat.com/?q=percentage+of+climate+scientists+who+accept+global+warming

OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
post #23 of 71
Originally Posted by shen View Post

But hey, since you are special... 

 

Except this isn’t about me. Take five seconds and absorb context and you’d see that. No, a link to Google is not an argument nor a proof.

post #24 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Read my post. Read your post. There’s your proof. This isn’t a difficult concept to grasp. 

 

I thought so too, but here you are not grasping it.

 

Again, where is the straw man?  Sarcasm?  Yeah.  False argument?  Nope, not so much.

 

Solar is good economic and environmental policy.  The suggestion that limiting yourself to a specific nations power (your own in this case) is foolish and jingoism.  So your reading suggestion?  You should try it!

OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
post #25 of 71
Originally Posted by shen View Post

The suggestion that limiting yourself to a specific nations power

 

Yep. Because nations (of none of which I was speaking) can only ever produce one type of power¡

 

Please stop talking.

post #26 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Except this isn’t about me. Take five seconds and absorb context and you’d see that. No, a link to Google is not an argument nor a proof.

 

So your link to a fallacy that you obviously didn't understand and that wasn't used is an argument, but my link to a paper by NASA about scholarly consensus is not?  Got it!

 

Any other lessons in logic you have for us tonight?

OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
post #27 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Yep. Because nations (of none of which I was speaking) can only ever produce one type of power¡

 

Please stop talking.

 

So when you said "American" you were speaking of any nation.  Got it.

 

Sorry, I understand this is difficult, I am just trying to understand.

 

Quote:
 

Well… no. Not at all.


Every government building should use American power.

 

I guess given the new revelation that you didn't mean a nation in this statement, you mean power with an American birth certificate?

 

Maybe power made from Americans?  Soylent power!

OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
post #28 of 71
I charge my iPhone exclusively with solar energy. I should have told Tim about this so he could out in this report. It would have changed the numbers! ; - )

But seriously, how about Apple selling solar phone chargers? Or better yet, designing a cool one. I made mine out of two small panels and an external battery (the kind sold for phones). Practical, not expensive, but not elegant.
post #29 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by shen View Post
 

Why is the climate any different?

 

Political and economic motivations, my friend. Do you think that scientists work for free or out of the goodness of their hearts?

 

I am not a liberal, a person who subscribes to group think and who takes their marching orders from others. I am an independent free thinker who could give a rats ass about what the majority of anything believes. Historically speaking, the majority has been dead wrong a number of times in the past. I am able to assess information myself, and then draw my own conclusions. Anything can be fudged and cherry picked, including numbers, statistics and "scientific data" to fit particular agendas. Look at how Samsung fudges and cheats with their technical data for the specs and tests for their devices. The evidence so far does not support the views of the radical lunatics running around, fear mongering with their moronic doomsday scenarios.

 

If somebody wishes to believe in global warming or whatever else liberals are told to believe in at any particular time, then go right ahead. They are free to believe in whatever sorcery and witchcraft nonsense that they like, but they had better not involve me or force others to participate in their evil schemes.

post #30 of 71
Originally Posted by shen View Post

I guess given the new revelation that you didn't mean a nation in this statement, you mean power with an American birth certificate?

 

Maybe power made from Americans?  Soylent power!

 

Yeah, you’re really endearing yourself to everyone here.

post #31 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by shen View Post
Sorry, I understand this is difficult, I am just trying to understand.

 

 

What's so hard to understand about "American" power?

 

The USA obviously needs to free itself entirely from importing any oil which comes from backwards, crappy countries that are not our friends. That's why I support solar and other such initiatives in the USA, not because of any environmental reasons. 

post #32 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

*cough*/*cough*

 

Take a step back before replying in yet another thread.

Wrong answer, as usual.

 

Appeal to authority can't be cited here because the authority cited is an expert, unlike the landscape architecture professors and political scientists who comprise the anti-global warming "consensus."

post #33 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 

 

What's so hard to understand about "American" power?

 

The USA obviously needs to free itself entirely from importing any oil which comes from backwards, crappy countries that are not our friends. That's why I support solar and other such initiatives in the USA, not because of any environmental reasons. 

That's good enough for me.  

post #34 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Yeah, you’re really endearing yourself to everyone here.

 

The idea that I need to endear myself to anyone to be correct is a logical fallacy.  It is a variation of the appeal to popularity.  The fallicy you claimed (erroneously) that I was using.

 

Anything you want to add to that?

OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
post #35 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 

 

Political and economic motivations, my friend. Do you think that scientists work for free or out of the goodness of their hearts?

 

So scientists, who many studies have shown find it easier to get grant money when they challenge the system, are all in agreement because somehow that makes them money.  But the oil and gas companies that have been shown to fund the majority of anti-climate rhetoric, and which have billions to spend, are clearly not suffering from this problem....

 

http://drexel.edu/now/news-media/releases/archive/2013/December/Climate-Change/

 

Quote:
 

I am not a liberal, a person who subscribes to group think and who takes their marching orders from others.

 

Psychology tells us that the authoritarian or conservative mind is more likely to do this.  You may want to look into that.

 

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

 

Quote:

 

I am an independent free thinker who could give a rats ass about what the majority of anything believes. Historically speaking, the majority has been dead wrong a number of times in the past. I am able to assess information myself, and then draw my own conclusions. Anything can be fudged and cherry picked, including numbers, statistics and "scientific data" to fit particular agendas. Look at how Samsung fudges and cheats with their technical data for the specs and tests for their devices. The evidence so far does not support the views of the radical lunatics running around, fear mongering with their moronic doomsday scenarios.

 

If somebody wishes to believe in global warming or whatever else liberals are told to believe in at any particular time, then go right ahead. They are free to believe in whatever sorcery and witchcraft nonsense that they like, but they had better not involve me or force others to participate in their evil schemes.

 

The important difference between your examples and climate change, is that climate change is simple science.  There are greenhouses gases.  It is easy to show that they are greenhouse gases.  High school level labs can demonstrate this.  The gases are increasing.  We know how to measure them.  The temperature is rising.  Theses are pretty basic facts.

 

If you are able to assess information yourself, perhaps you should question where you are getting that information from, since you seem to think that information from oil companies, whose jobs depend on climate change being wrong, are a good source, but evil scientists, who will have jobs studying climate whether it is warming, cooling, or holding steady, are manipulating data for money.  

OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
post #36 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 

 

What's so hard to understand about "American" power?

 

The USA obviously needs to free itself entirely from importing any oil which comes from backwards, crappy countries that are not our friends. That's why I support solar and other such initiatives in the USA, not because of any environmental reasons. 

 

You may choose to support solar for that reason.  That is also a valid reason.  If you feel that reason is more important than climate, that is your opinion.  You may do so.

 

However, if you feel that there is no climate change, then you are simply wrong.  That is an important difference.

 

But to answer your first question, nothing is difficult about what you said.  I replied to Tallest.  So the only thing hard to understand is why you think I didn't understand you when I replied to him.

 

He phrased a reply suggesting that he disagrees with solar, and only wants government buildings to be powered by "American power" which is either poor phrasing, because generating power from your own roof is local power, or he is bringing needless jingoism into a discussion about a single companies power generation.  Or, third option, something else entirely, which he hasn't explained, because when it is pointed out that he is wrong his reply tends to be "Shut. Up."

 

At which point it is worth noting that "backwards, crappy countries" as you call them is also a needlessly judgmental and ignorant phrase.

 

Maybe you replied to my comment to Tallest because you are the same person?  The same jingoism seems to be coming out...

OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
post #37 of 71
Originally Posted by Conrail View Post

Appeal to authority cant be cited here because the authority cited is an expert

 

That’s the definition, kiddo.

 

Originally Posted by shen View Post

The idea that I need to endear myself to anyone to be correct is a logical fallacy.

 

Again with the strawmen! Hey, enjoy your utter failure of comprehension. Though really, it’s a failure of reading.

post #38 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Keep in mind that 'energy neutral', 'carbon neutral', etc. is not the same as "cheaper" or without great cost.

The upfront costs are highly, but you'll save on the monthly energy costs, and if you produce more energy than you use that extra energy goes out onto the grid and the power company pays you.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #39 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

That’s the definition, kiddo.

 

 

Again with the strawmen! Hey, enjoy your utter failure of comprehension. Though really, it’s a failure of reading.

 

Actually, no, that isn't the definition.

 

Quote:
 

Argument from authority (also known as appeal to authority) is a fallacy of defective induction, where it is argued that a statement is correct because the statement is made by a person or source that is commonly regarded as authoritative.

 

This is a fallacy because the truth or falsity of a claim is not related to the authority of the claimant, and because the premises can be true, and the conclusion false (an authoritative claim can turn out to be false). It is also known as argumentum ad verecundiam (Latinargument to respect) oripse dixit (Latin: he himself said it).

 

On the other hand, arguments from authority are an important part of informal logic. Since we cannot have expert knowledge of many subjects, we often rely on the judgments of those who do. There is no fallacy involved in simply arguing that the assertion made by an authority is true. The fallacy only arises when it is claimed or implied that the authority is infallible in principle and can hence be exempted from criticism.

 

If anyone here is stating that the climate is warming only because a climate scientist said so, then that would be an issue.  What is actually claimed is that trusting a majority of climate scientists to show data, models, studies, and evidence over FUD from oil billionaires is reasonable.  They are not right because they study climate, but it does speak to their expertise.  Further, since the shotgun approach of denier arguments frequently elf [edit: self, obviously.  Legolas does not enter into the picture here] contradicts, and contradicts easily available data, their argument holds much less weight.

 

We can focus on your failure to understand the strawman once you get a grasp on authority and expertise.

OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
post #40 of 71
Originally Posted by shen View Post

We can focus on your failure to understand the strawman once you get a grasp on authority and expertise.

 

Or, no, you could just reply to what is written, not what is not. This is the first time you’ve actually done that, by the way. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple says working toward 'net zero energy' and green products in Environmental Responsibility Report