Greenpeace slams Apple's iCloud for relying 'heavily on dirty energy'



  • Reply 81 of 111
    Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

    Greenpeace came around to my house last month looking for donations. I told them I already donated to the French Secret Service.

    Donate them to bullshit ?
  • Reply 82 of 111
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,414member
    Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

    you don't shoot seals, you beat them with a club.

    I wonder if Greenpeace checked with their ISP and/or hosting centers to see if they are all green.

    That would be Network Solutions ...
  • Reply 83 of 111
    kdgonekdgone Posts: 2member
    Here we go again: Greenpeace whoring for fame

    Instead of tackling the whole industry, they lazily go after the most popular one. All I ever hear about is them going after Apple. They're no less activists than that bum co-worker who's pretending to do his job.

    What's worse, people donate to these yahoos because of their name. My cousin is one of them -- he doesn't follow what they do but stroke's his ego saying that he donated.
  • Reply 84 of 111
    tylerk36tylerk36 Posts: 1,037member
    Green peace head quarters depends upon electricity that comes from fossil fuels. Their ships and boats run off of fossil fuels. Yet they slam Apple for depending on Electricity generated by fossil fuels.
  • Reply 85 of 111
    Remind me what GreenPeace uses to fuel their boats that they use in their eco-terrorism acts such as hassling Japanese boats?

    Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

    GreenPeace can kiss my fat hairy buttocks before I ever take them seriously. Bunch of hypocrites.
  • Reply 86 of 111
    Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

    Actually, I was going to include that clear cutting that Apple did next to their new North Carolina plant to install the solar arrays. Kind of ironic that they have to raze down acres of beautiful, green land with ecosystems inside of it, only to replace with "green" solar panels that frankly require some of the nastiest environmentally-damaging chemicals and processes to make.

    Just my 2 cents in the cause for portable nuclear power...

    Actually if you look at the satellite shots of the area which predate the building of the datacenter you will see that most of it was already mostly cleared for farming -they may have dropped an acre or two of new growth wooded area at best. And do you know that Apple is in fact using those panels requiring the "nastiest environmentally damaging chemicals and processes" or using suppliers like BioSolar or Solarus that use either bio-friendly or recycled materials.
  • Reply 87 of 111
    Originally Posted by whatisgoingon View Post

    It's not being 'green' to just build your data center 100 ft closer than your competitors data center to a so-called 'green' power source like a dam.

    That is true. That is not being 'green'.

    But then again, nobody ever said it was.
  • Reply 88 of 111
    patranuspatranus Posts: 366member
    I don't get it.

    Amazon, Microsoft, and Apple use the most nuclear power, the cleanest, safest, and most economical form of energy generation this planet has ever seen.
  • Reply 89 of 111
    nealgnealg Posts: 132member
    According to this piece by All Things D
  • Reply 90 of 111
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member
    Hey Greenpeace,

    if all the "dirty" coal power stations stopped operating right now, the world would collapse as the power shut down for most of it.
  • Reply 91 of 111
    Originally Posted by kent909 View Post

    You know this to be true because you saw your favorite politician on TV say this. You know he was telling you the truth because he had his favorite lobbyist standing behind him.

    Perhaps its true, because it's TRUE.
  • Reply 92 of 111
    Originally Posted by GQB View Post

    So now Greenpeace needs to join Consumer Reports in tailgating Apple's visibility to get their own publicity? Sad.

    Two formerly great organizations reduced to trolling.

    Been here since 2007 and this surprises you?

    Greenpeace hounding Apple is nothing new.

    And unlike Consumer Reports, this is the Greenpeace status quo.
  • Reply 93 of 111
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Originally Posted by nealg View Post

    According to this piece by All Things D

    Why is anyone surprised when Greenpeace gets things all wrong?

    Interestingly, when the thread came up before, I pointed out that Greenpeace's estimate of 10% of total power from solar was wrong because they vastly overestimated energy usage. All Things D came to the same conclusion.
  • Reply 94 of 111
    sc_marktsc_markt Posts: 1,395member
    Eff Greenpeace, bunch of left-wing anti-capitalist and free market marxists...
  • Reply 95 of 111
    razorpitrazorpit Posts: 1,060member
    Originally Posted by mytdave View Post

    Boneheads. There is nothing wrong with burning coal to generate power. It is done extremely clean and safely these days. Coal can help provide energy independence for this country - we have tons of it.

    I would like to see the number of coal fired power plants quadruple, and an increase in the production of petroleum by squeezing shale. Greenpeace can kiss my posterior and go crawl back under the rock where they came from.

    Apple should build several more data centers and locate them right smack in the center of coal powered areas of the country (where they're also likely to realize the lowest operational costs).

    Originally Posted by kent909 View Post

    You know this to be true because you saw your favorite politician on TV say this. You know he was telling you the truth because he had his favorite lobbyist standing behind him.

    So since President Obama is against coal power and his lobbyists from wind and solar power industries are "so much wiser" coal is a no, no? Continue pursuing algae, wind, solar, etc. and when they are able to outperform a coal powered plant we'll make the switch. Until then please keep the snarky attitude for mum and dad.
  • Reply 96 of 111
    8002580025 Posts: 172member
    The new report issued on Tuesday, entitled "How Clean is Your Cloud?," pans Apple's iCloud service for relying largely on coal-based power. Apple was lumped in with Amazon and Microsoft as companies that Greenpeace claims "rely heavily on dirty energy to power their clouds."

    "Instead of playing catch up, Apple has the ingenuity, on-hand cash and innovative spirit to Think Different and make substantial improvements in the type of energy that powers its cloud," the report reads.

    You know, I've about had it with these idiots. Last I checked, Apple (among others) weren't in the power generation or distribution business. Like hundreds of other business and millions of customers in the area, they rely on power generated by the 'dirty' power companies. Why not slam these other business and consumers as well? No, be cause it grabs headlines to slam tech companies. Go after the power companies, be an of change where you might just be effective. Then again you tried that and were told to take a hike...

    And who is Greenpeace to say what Apple or any other business should do with their 'on-hand cash'? Bunch of finger pointing attempt to do-gooders.
  • Reply 97 of 111
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,317member
    Stop with the factually barren nonsense that Clean and Coal are married together.

    Study Chemistry, Thermodynamics and much more or please stop fud'ing up the board. Go h ang out with the DDT fans.
  • Reply 98 of 111
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,317member
    Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post

    Actually, it would be nice if either or both of you could cite some references.

    Go read reports from the DoE on how unclean Clean Coal is or go bother any ABET accredited University with respected programs in Chemisty, Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science.

    I'd suggest you become an M.E. but I doubt you'd be asking about citations if you already were one. We knew Coal was and always would be dirty back during my undergrad M.E. degree.
  • Reply 99 of 111
    Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post

    Actually, it would be nice if either or both of you could cite some references.

    The dirtiness of coal is common knowledge as is the efforts of the coal lobby to claim against all scientific evidence that there is such a thing as "clean" coal technology.

    It's also, basic science ... when someone makes an outrageous or sensational claim that defies common sense, reason and established science ... the onus is on them to prove their claim.

    Claiming "coal is clean" and there is "nothing wrong" with burning it, equates with claiming that a UFO ate your lunch or your Mother was Hitler.
  • Reply 100 of 111
    nealgnealg Posts: 132member
    I know this was put out by Apple and will put Apple in the best light possible, but it would seem that Greenpeace, besides being wrong on this issue of cloud computing, should look at the total carbon footprint for a company

    I wonder what computers they use at Greenpeace and I wonder if they vet all their venders for energy efficiency, among other things.

Sign In or Register to comment.