Apple's Tim Cook says Indian operations to use all-green energy within 6 months
More details have emerged from Sunday's encounter between Apple CEO Tim Cook and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, during which Cook reportedly revealed he expects Apple's Indian operations to run entirely off renewable energy by the end of 2017.

The transition should happen within the next six months, Reuters quoted Cook as saying, based on a source familiar with Sunday's corporate roundtable. Cook and 20 other executives -- such as Amazon's Jeff Bezos, and Google's Sundar Pichai -- met with Modi in Washington, D.C.
Cook also claimed that Apple has generated 740,000 jobs in India by way of the "app economy," and that local developers have produced almost 100,000 apps.
The CEO likely needs Modi's favor, since Apple has only just begun assembly in India and may want further tax concessions. The company has also yet to get approval for retail stores in the country, something contingent on local sourcing abilities.
Modi has championed a program called "Make in India," designed to spur local manufacturing. This has drawn concerns from some foreign multinationals, though it's unknown if Apple has resisted to any degree.
The company has been pursuing a global green energy strategy regardless of Indian politics, aiming to use renewable sources wherever possible. This includes nudging suppliers towards green power, or at least offsetting some of their environmental impact.

The transition should happen within the next six months, Reuters quoted Cook as saying, based on a source familiar with Sunday's corporate roundtable. Cook and 20 other executives -- such as Amazon's Jeff Bezos, and Google's Sundar Pichai -- met with Modi in Washington, D.C.
Cook also claimed that Apple has generated 740,000 jobs in India by way of the "app economy," and that local developers have produced almost 100,000 apps.
The CEO likely needs Modi's favor, since Apple has only just begun assembly in India and may want further tax concessions. The company has also yet to get approval for retail stores in the country, something contingent on local sourcing abilities.
Modi has championed a program called "Make in India," designed to spur local manufacturing. This has drawn concerns from some foreign multinationals, though it's unknown if Apple has resisted to any degree.
The company has been pursuing a global green energy strategy regardless of Indian politics, aiming to use renewable sources wherever possible. This includes nudging suppliers towards green power, or at least offsetting some of their environmental impact.
Comments
I dare you to make a statement like that vis-a-vis the US, by say, substituting the 'N' word for the 'U' word, and say, 'cotton-picking generators' for 'hamster-wheel type generators.'
Go on, let's see you do it.
Wow! Stop the presses!! We have a marketing/PR genius in our midst, Tim!!!
Do you seriously have to ask the same question again and again on every thread that talks about Apple and India?
How about we analyze communication and then either get offended by intent or ask follow up questions to verify intent? I agree with you that untouchables is an offensive term, but I can't be certain if @teaearlegreyhot's intent is to be offensive. Do you think Louis CK's bit in the link above is mean to be offensive or is he simply pointing out something about society. We both know that castes still exist and there are far too many destitute people in India that have never had a chance at life. If he would've said, "'Renewable energy' in India means 25,000 [Dalit] running in hamster-wheel type generators," would that have made it better? Would you have responded the same way? Is he just attempting social commentary like comedians try to do?
PS: I've always found it odd that terms like "jungle fever" are somehow acceptable—Spike Lee even wrote and directed a movie by that name!—yet the term only has one meaning when it comes to relationships and that is one person is dating someone who is uncivilized or primitive. It never just means just an uncultured person of any so-called "race" and is used no matter how educated this "black" person is. Why isn't that offensive as fuck?
2) When you use terms such as "fanciful," or "Maslow's hierarchy" (I doubt you have any clue what the notion of self-actualization means in the Indian culture or context -- that's something else you may wish to try and understand), "Apple's solutions seem out of touch," or "English sipping tea in Calcutta in 1850" (c'mon, tell me that wasn't sarcasm), you are clearly justifying, not explaining.
2) I'd say that telling someone that they have no idea what self-actualization means is the most offensive comment anyone has made directly to another forum member on this thread.
What happened to you sir? Way too much use of F word than necessary???
2) Give me break: stop cherry-picking what I wrote to grotesquely quote it out of context. That is inexcusable. I said "what the notion of self-actualization means in the Indian culture or context". One, he brought up Maslow's hierarchy of needs, where the top of the pyramid is "self actualization." Two, I am sure you'll agree that Indian culture, history, Hinduism/Buddhism/Jainism as major religions that came out of the subcontinent, and various branches of rather substantive Eastern philosophies that have come from there over many millennia are replete with references to self-actualization as the ultimate goal of human existence, and paths to its achievement. (Happy to engage you in a detailed conversation on that offline, if you're interested.) Three, the OP admitted that the basis for his post was interactions that he had with a couple of Indians 25 years ago, which did not suggest a great deal of depth or thought, let alone any major understanding of India. Please explain the validity of your comment given these qualifiers.