Cheap hydro power. Why Google put their data center in Oregon - to leverage the Columbia River Basin dams. The dams that won us World War II powering the aluminum factories of Alcoa and the airplane plants of Boeing - and also why Boeing is in Seattle - but I digress...
Edit - apparently it's not close enough to TVA - from the Wired article:
Quote:
But Apple finds itself in this situation because it’s trying to reduce its reliance on the environmentally unfriendly energy sources — primarily coal and nuclear — that power the Duke Energy grid that Apple uses, says Greenpeace’s Cook. “They’re trying to do what they can onsite to reduce their emissions footprint,” he says. “It’s a very dirty energy grid — North Carolina is 60 percent coal, and this is one way to try to reduce that load.”
Then again I just got suckered into quoting the whole 60% coal thing which was sourced from Greenpeace. Yup - there's an unbiased source :P
Yes I did read it and admit my rebuttal was a bit histrionic. My main thesis is that a nuclear power fallout can have devastating consequences across the globe.
Congress gets more background radiation from the natural granite in the capital than from a chest X-ray. And a chest X-ray is shorter duration vs. continuous exposure. Hmm, perhaps that's why most of them are hardly in the capital...
Quote:
Even oil and coal plants are much more contained than that.
Who's? Ours? That's nice. Too bad we get shit in the atmosphere from China all the time.
Most smart people aren't skeptical about man made global warming because they are anti-science. They are skeptical about the vision of man made global warming that is being proffered because the "solutions" being proffered happen to directly financially benefit the pushers of those solutions.
Fascinating. Imagine that. There's a crises and some well connected people stand to benefit from the proposed solutions.
But pay no attention to the above - I'm just Anti-Science and hey! Isn't that a 1%'er over there? Get 'em!
Sigh....
Quote:
There is also a finite amount of uranium supply
Far more energy is available from nuclear than from fossil fuels. And it's far cleaner.
Quote:
so it is not the solution to long term energy use
Nice try, but your wrong. Fusion - the ultimate solution to our energy problems is 100% nuclear. Make up your mind - are fossil fuels bad and we need to get off of them or not? Because wind, solar and hydro are a pipe dream. Actually it could be fun watching one faction of enviro-nuts take on another faction of enviro-nuts on dams vs. fish/river ecosystem. I'll get my popcorn.
I'm surprised that more people from the audibon society aren't up in arms about bird kills with wind...
Quote:
and storing all of those spent rods takes thousands of years
You can re-burn the fuel - which yields more energy and greatly reduces the quantity and "badness" as well as the length of storing really bad stuff vs. stuff that can be stored safely in passive containment systems quite well. The only reasons we don't now are more politics and brain-dead policy. They aren't science or technical problems...
Quote:
quite a burden on your grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's great great grandchildren.
Godwins law for nuclear power threads. Congratulations.
Rich hippies, but none the less it's there at the core. Not that I'm saying it's a bad thing, mind you...
Uuh maybe 100 billion dollars ago, do some of you really believe that Apple is this good hearted entity. Did you know that Apple is the worst charitable company in the industry. I mean I personaly don't care, they can do what they want with their money but don't think for a second that they are anything but a company seeking world domination like the rest of them.
They just happen to make good products that we like, that's it.
I think this person was just making a conversation. You don't have to be so abtuse. Most of it is buried. I know here in Switzerland even though over 60% percent of electricity comes from hydro we still import some of our electricity from France which uses Nuclear. To cut down on our bill with them we agreed to bury a certain amount of their waste in underground caverns in mountains lined with lead, concrete and then natural marble.
Uuh maybe 100 billion dollars ago, do some of you really believe that Apple is this good hearted entity. Did you know that Apple is the worst charitable company in the industry. I mean I personaly don't care, they can do what they want with their money but don't think for a second that they are anything but a company seeking world domination like the rest of them.
They just happen to make good products that we like, that's it.
So what's your point? Others are different?
No one is naive enough to believe that a company -- any company -- is a "good-hearted entity." You're simply creating a strawman.
Incidentally, if you "personally don't care" it's odd that you bring up the fact that Apple is the "worst charitable company in the industry."
I think this person was just making a conversation. You don't have to be so abtuse. Most of it is buried. I know here in Switzerland even though over 60% percent of electricity comes from hydro we still import some of our electricity from France which uses Nuclear. To cut down on our bill with them we agreed to bury a certain amount of their waste in underground caverns in mountains lined with lead, concrete and then natural marble.
I've replied in enough detail to him. When someone posts a question the answer to which is a click away, that's lazy.
If it's your wont to indulge something like that, go right ahead. Don't presume to give me advice or call me 'abtuse' [sic]. (I think you may mean 'obtuse' or 'abstruse', depending on what you intended to say).
No one is naive enough to believe that a company -- any company -- is a "good-hearted entity." You're simply creating a strawman.
Incidentally, if you "personally don't care" it's odd that you brip the fact that Apple is the "worst charitable company in the industry."
8,000 plus posts since 2006, wasn't that the year that Apple attacked Appleinsider for leaking and got lawyers envolved. I don't know what the outcome was but I'm really starting to think that Apple has a presence here.
I'm not saying your a plant just thinking out loud. I was just replying to someone who thinks Apple is a bunch of lefty hippies when that is the farthest from the truth. They are a greedy manufacturer like the rest of them. Like the rest of them, I said that in my previous post. No I don't think others are different that's why I said like the rest of them. See get it, sorry but I think I have to keep repeating myself sometimes to get my point across as you thought I was just singling Apple out.
8,000 plus posts since 2006, wasn't that the year that Apple attacked Appleinsider for leaking and got lawyers envolved. I don't know what the outcome was but I'm really starting to think that Apple has a presence here.
You know, that's an interesting idea, but to what end? What would it serve? Under your assumed conditions, there would be no point in an Apple plant here unless their purpose was to gain enough trust to become a moderator. Then they could efficiently find leaks due to the enhanced features.
? No, I'm not an Apple plant. "Cops can't say that, right?"
8,000 plus posts since 2006, wasn't that the year that Apple attacked Appleinsider for leaking and got lawyers envolved. I don't know what the outcome was but I'm really starting to think that Apple has a presence here.
I'm not saying your a plant just thinking out loud. I was just replying to someone who thinks Apple is a bunch of lefty hippies when that is the farthest from the truth. They are a greedy manufacturer like the rest of them. Like the rest of them, I said that in my previous post. No I don't think others are different that's why I said like the rest of them. See get it, sorry but I think I have to keep repeating myself sometimes to get my point across as you thought I was just singling Apple out.
You're rambling, and making even less sense than usual.
Must be pretty late there in Switzerland, so perhaps it's time to call it a day.
Those data centers are energy hogs. Kudos to Apple for taking the initiative and not just plugging in to the grid. Sounds like they might be taking a public relations hit with the anti solar crowd but I'm sure that will blow over.
Unless the US moves to 4th Generation Nuclear [Ironically, it was 1st generation and banned as the first act of the newly christened Atomic Energy Commission; and invented by Ernesto Fermi--the father of Thermodynamics] being Pebble Bed and using a substitute to Uranium the only changes in US Nuclear deployment will be the decomissioning of these relics and developing more advanced technologies to work with nuclear waste management.
I find these requirements as a Mechanical Engineering unappealing:
Quote:
Section 207 of the bill, ?ASME Nuclear Certification Credit,? would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 relating to business-related credits to:
In General- For purposes of section 38, the ASME nuclear certification credit determined under this section for any taxable year is an amount equal to 15 percent of the qualified nuclear expenditures paid or incurred by the taxpayer.
Qualified Nuclear Expenditures- For purposes of this section, the term `qualified nuclear expenditures' means any expenditure related to-
obtaining a new certification under the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Nuclear Component Certification program;
recertifying, changing, or otherwise upgrading an existing certification under the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Nuclear Component Certification program; or,
increasing the taxpayer's capacity to construct, fabricate, assemble, or install components?
for any facility which uses nuclear energy to produce electricity, and
with respect to the construction, fabrication, assembly, or installation of which the taxpayer is certified under such program.?
If the bill is approved, the ASME Nuclear Certification Credit would be available to qualified taxpayers for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2010 through taxable years ending December 31, 2025.
S. 3618 contains other provisions vital to further enabling the nuclear renaissance in the United States, while also improving energy security and reducing future pollution and greenhouse gas emissions by:
Accelerating the development of small modular reactors by directing the Department of Energy (DOE) to develop a 50 percent cost-sharing plan with industry at $100 million per year for 10 years;
Establishing a National Nuclear Energy Council under DOE to provide an independent forum through which to address national strategy and significant issues facing the nuclear industry; and,
Financing new nuclear power plants through $54 billion in DOE loan guarantees.
I'd rather see $54 Billion in funding split by half going for 4th Generation [including clean up of plants it replaces] and half going for Solar/Wind/BioFuel R&D to consumer use.
In short, $27.5 Billion for 4G Pebble Bed and $27.5 Billion for Green Tech that has no hazardess waste future.
As the Materials Science advances making Coal more rapidly obsolete it'll be clear that new types of compact Solar Collector designs connected to power conversion for later distribution will need to be ready to meet the future needs. Same goes for Wind and Biofuels created fro Biomass conversion.
Uuh maybe 100 billion dollars ago, do some of you really believe that Apple is this good hearted entity. Did you know that Apple is the worst charitable company in the industry. I mean I personaly don't care, they can do what they want with their money but don't think for a second that they are anything but a company seeking world domination like the rest of them.
They just happen to make good products that we like, that's it.
That's ridiculous.
First, Apple is not supposed to be a charitable organization. It's not their job.
Second, you don't have any idea how much Apple (or Steve Jobs/Tim Cook personally) spend on charity.
Third, when you look at their efforts, Apple is miles ahead of any of their competitors in recyclability of their products and green manufacturing practices.
Fourth, if you consider the purpose of a charity is to 'spread happiness', Apple does that quite well.
FYI: The claim that the renewables "will provide 9.8 percent of the energy" comes from Greenpeace and is highly suspect. Their calculations assume that every device in the data center will be running at 100% its rated utilization for 100% of the time and there is zero overhead for redundancy.
It's sort of like calculating the annual power usage for your 1.1kW (1100W) toaster like this:
1.1kW * 24h * 365d = 9636 kWh per year
Which ignores the fact that even if you did you your toaster 24h a day, the element is not on that whole time. Thus, actual power consumed is much less.
Having been involved in the design and construction of large data centers, actual usage is nowhere near the maximum design rating of 200W psf.
Agreed, rehashing talking points from people who are in the pockets of big oil simply makes you look gullible. I don't agree that alternative energy is always the best choice but sometimes it is.
The government needs to stop subsidizing alternative energy & instead reward the consumers who invest in alternative energy that works. Stop trying to penalize people for using too much energy or favoring sources through penalties & fees. How about instead we reward people through vouchers or tax write offs for investing in alternative energy that actually works. Let the market pick solutions that work instead of pouring money into solutions that don't.
And for crying out loud, start building some nuclear power plants, we've come a long way with nuclear technology since the days of 3 mile island. Heck we even have submarines powered by it now, not to mention ~80% of the president's beloved France.
I think you may want to think of this in a completely different way:
Maybe this is one large scale laboratory that will be used to practically develope alternative power.
If apple uses its resources including funding and ability to manufacture and produce a more efficient and affordable alternative power system available for everyone, the would have not only made an important contribution to Mankind but also has the potential of freeing the world on its dependence on petroleum. In turn it will be the most powerful entity on the planet
I agree, although I don't see Apple getting into the energy business. If Apple did make a major leap in the development of practical renewal power, that would do more to "change the world" than any computer they ever made. If Apple was successful at this, can you imagine if everyone who attempts to copy Apple today, attempted to copy them at this - where it would become "unhip" or "politically incorrect" to build or operate a factory that didn't use renewable power?
Having said that, I do have some of the concerns, as expressed by others, about clear-cutting the land to obtain the goal. I would have felt a lot better if this was an abandoned factory or shopping center. And I am hoping that the solar farm and "gas factory" does produce far more than 10% of the necessary power. I also question, as others have, why a great number of solar panels couldn't be placed on top of these facilities, rather than on new land, but obviously, we don't know the full plan as yet.
As for nuclear energy, it doesn't matter what the reality is - nuclear energy is dead. You're not going to see any new reactors anywhere, except perhaps in places like North Korea or eventually Iran (if Israel doesn't bomb it first) - places where the people have no say whatsoever. I don't even think you'll see new reactors built in China. What you are going to see is tons of reactors decommissioned in coming years, especially in Europe, even if that does have an overall negative impact on the environment as countries return to coal and other dirtier sources of fuel.
As for nuclear energy, it doesn't matter what the reality is - nuclear energy is dead. You're not going to see any new reactors anywhere, except perhaps in places like North Korea .....
I guess the 60 reactors being built must be happening on Venus. /s
Comments
And considering how the electricity is made in the US, it maybe very well come from a dirty electricity power plant.
I always assumed they picked the Carolina's for the same reason the DOD picked the location they did for Oak Ridge: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_Valley_Authority
Cheap hydro power. Why Google put their data center in Oregon - to leverage the Columbia River Basin dams. The dams that won us World War II powering the aluminum factories of Alcoa and the airplane plants of Boeing - and also why Boeing is in Seattle - but I digress...
Edit - apparently it's not close enough to TVA - from the Wired article:
But Apple finds itself in this situation because it’s trying to reduce its reliance on the environmentally unfriendly energy sources — primarily coal and nuclear — that power the Duke Energy grid that Apple uses, says Greenpeace’s Cook. “They’re trying to do what they can onsite to reduce their emissions footprint,” he says. “It’s a very dirty energy grid — North Carolina is 60 percent coal, and this is one way to try to reduce that load.”
Then again I just got suckered into quoting the whole 60% coal thing which was sourced from Greenpeace. Yup - there's an unbiased source :P
Yes I did read it and admit my rebuttal was a bit histrionic. My main thesis is that a nuclear power fallout can have devastating consequences across the globe.
Congress gets more background radiation from the natural granite in the capital than from a chest X-ray. And a chest X-ray is shorter duration vs. continuous exposure. Hmm, perhaps that's why most of them are hardly in the capital...
Even oil and coal plants are much more contained than that.
Who's? Ours? That's nice. Too bad we get shit in the atmosphere from China all the time.
Most smart people aren't skeptical about man made global warming because they are anti-science. They are skeptical about the vision of man made global warming that is being proffered because the "solutions" being proffered happen to directly financially benefit the pushers of those solutions.
Fascinating. Imagine that. There's a crises and some well connected people stand to benefit from the proposed solutions.
But pay no attention to the above - I'm just Anti-Science and hey! Isn't that a 1%'er over there? Get 'em!
Sigh....
There is also a finite amount of uranium supply
Far more energy is available from nuclear than from fossil fuels. And it's far cleaner.
so it is not the solution to long term energy use
Nice try, but your wrong. Fusion - the ultimate solution to our energy problems is 100% nuclear. Make up your mind - are fossil fuels bad and we need to get off of them or not? Because wind, solar and hydro are a pipe dream. Actually it could be fun watching one faction of enviro-nuts take on another faction of enviro-nuts on dams vs. fish/river ecosystem. I'll get my popcorn.
I'm surprised that more people from the audibon society aren't up in arms about bird kills with wind...
and storing all of those spent rods takes thousands of years
You can re-burn the fuel - which yields more energy and greatly reduces the quantity and "badness" as well as the length of storing really bad stuff vs. stuff that can be stored safely in passive containment systems quite well. The only reasons we don't now are more politics and brain-dead policy. They aren't science or technical problems...
quite a burden on your grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's great great grandchildren.
Godwins law for nuclear power threads. Congratulations.
I'm sure this is just a publicity stunt to get those hippies off of Apple's back
Er, Apple is run by hippies.
Rich hippies, but none the less it's there at the core. Not that I'm saying it's a bad thing, mind you...
Where is the nuclear waste stored? And for how long?
Do a search, and find out for yourself.
Er, Apple is run by hippies.
Rich hippies, but none the less it's there at the core. Not that I'm saying it's a bad thing, mind you...
Uuh maybe 100 billion dollars ago, do some of you really believe that Apple is this good hearted entity. Did you know that Apple is the worst charitable company in the industry. I mean I personaly don't care, they can do what they want with their money but don't think for a second that they are anything but a company seeking world domination like the rest of them.
They just happen to make good products that we like, that's it.
Do a search, and find out for yourself.
I think this person was just making a conversation. You don't have to be so abtuse. Most of it is buried. I know here in Switzerland even though over 60% percent of electricity comes from hydro we still import some of our electricity from France which uses Nuclear. To cut down on our bill with them we agreed to bury a certain amount of their waste in underground caverns in mountains lined with lead, concrete and then natural marble.
Uuh maybe 100 billion dollars ago, do some of you really believe that Apple is this good hearted entity. Did you know that Apple is the worst charitable company in the industry. I mean I personaly don't care, they can do what they want with their money but don't think for a second that they are anything but a company seeking world domination like the rest of them.
They just happen to make good products that we like, that's it.
So what's your point? Others are different?
No one is naive enough to believe that a company -- any company -- is a "good-hearted entity." You're simply creating a strawman.
Incidentally, if you "personally don't care" it's odd that you bring up the fact that Apple is the "worst charitable company in the industry."
I think this person was just making a conversation. You don't have to be so abtuse. Most of it is buried. I know here in Switzerland even though over 60% percent of electricity comes from hydro we still import some of our electricity from France which uses Nuclear. To cut down on our bill with them we agreed to bury a certain amount of their waste in underground caverns in mountains lined with lead, concrete and then natural marble.
I've replied in enough detail to him. When someone posts a question the answer to which is a click away, that's lazy.
If it's your wont to indulge something like that, go right ahead. Don't presume to give me advice or call me 'abtuse' [sic]. (I think you may mean 'obtuse' or 'abstruse', depending on what you intended to say).
So what's your point? Others are different?
No one is naive enough to believe that a company -- any company -- is a "good-hearted entity." You're simply creating a strawman.
Incidentally, if you "personally don't care" it's odd that you brip the fact that Apple is the "worst charitable company in the industry."
8,000 plus posts since 2006, wasn't that the year that Apple attacked Appleinsider for leaking and got lawyers envolved. I don't know what the outcome was but I'm really starting to think that Apple has a presence here.
I'm not saying your a plant just thinking out loud. I was just replying to someone who thinks Apple is a bunch of lefty hippies when that is the farthest from the truth. They are a greedy manufacturer like the rest of them. Like the rest of them, I said that in my previous post. No I don't think others are different that's why I said like the rest of them. See get it, sorry but I think I have to keep repeating myself sometimes to get my point across as you thought I was just singling Apple out.
8,000 plus posts since 2006, wasn't that the year that Apple attacked Appleinsider for leaking and got lawyers envolved. I don't know what the outcome was but I'm really starting to think that Apple has a presence here.
You know, that's an interesting idea, but to what end? What would it serve? Under your assumed conditions, there would be no point in an Apple plant here unless their purpose was to gain enough trust to become a moderator. Then they could efficiently find leaks due to the enhanced features.
? No, I'm not an Apple plant. "Cops can't say that, right?"
8,000 plus posts since 2006, wasn't that the year that Apple attacked Appleinsider for leaking and got lawyers envolved. I don't know what the outcome was but I'm really starting to think that Apple has a presence here.
I'm not saying your a plant just thinking out loud. I was just replying to someone who thinks Apple is a bunch of lefty hippies when that is the farthest from the truth. They are a greedy manufacturer like the rest of them. Like the rest of them, I said that in my previous post. No I don't think others are different that's why I said like the rest of them. See get it, sorry but I think I have to keep repeating myself sometimes to get my point across as you thought I was just singling Apple out.
You're rambling, and making even less sense than usual.
Must be pretty late there in Switzerland, so perhaps it's time to call it a day.
? No, I'm not an Apple plant. "Cops can't say that, right?"
Actually, being called an 'Apple plant' is the nicest thing anyone's said to me in public in this Forum!
China shortly after Japan's disaster announced a sole focus on 4th generation Pebble Bed for it's Nuclear future. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_IV_reactor]
China 210 MWe pebble bed reactor starts construction April, 2011
Then again from ASME's Legislation push in the US Congress [http://www.asme.org/kb/news---articl...e-legislation]
I find these requirements as a Mechanical Engineering unappealing:
Section 207 of the bill, ?ASME Nuclear Certification Credit,? would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 relating to business-related credits to:
If the bill is approved, the ASME Nuclear Certification Credit would be available to qualified taxpayers for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2010 through taxable years ending December 31, 2025.
S. 3618 contains other provisions vital to further enabling the nuclear renaissance in the United States, while also improving energy security and reducing future pollution and greenhouse gas emissions by:
I'd rather see $54 Billion in funding split by half going for 4th Generation [including clean up of plants it replaces] and half going for Solar/Wind/BioFuel R&D to consumer use.
In short, $27.5 Billion for 4G Pebble Bed and $27.5 Billion for Green Tech that has no hazardess waste future.
As the Materials Science advances making Coal more rapidly obsolete it'll be clear that new types of compact Solar Collector designs connected to power conversion for later distribution will need to be ready to meet the future needs. Same goes for Wind and Biofuels created fro Biomass conversion.
Uuh maybe 100 billion dollars ago, do some of you really believe that Apple is this good hearted entity. Did you know that Apple is the worst charitable company in the industry. I mean I personaly don't care, they can do what they want with their money but don't think for a second that they are anything but a company seeking world domination like the rest of them.
They just happen to make good products that we like, that's it.
That's ridiculous.
First, Apple is not supposed to be a charitable organization. It's not their job.
Second, you don't have any idea how much Apple (or Steve Jobs/Tim Cook personally) spend on charity.
Third, when you look at their efforts, Apple is miles ahead of any of their competitors in recyclability of their products and green manufacturing practices.
Fourth, if you consider the purpose of a charity is to 'spread happiness', Apple does that quite well.
FYI: The claim that the renewables "will provide 9.8 percent of the energy" comes from Greenpeace and is highly suspect. Their calculations assume that every device in the data center will be running at 100% its rated utilization for 100% of the time and there is zero overhead for redundancy.
It's sort of like calculating the annual power usage for your 1.1kW (1100W) toaster like this:
1.1kW * 24h * 365d = 9636 kWh per year
Which ignores the fact that even if you did you your toaster 24h a day, the element is not on that whole time. Thus, actual power consumed is much less.
Having been involved in the design and construction of large data centers, actual usage is nowhere near the maximum design rating of 200W psf.
Agreed, rehashing talking points from people who are in the pockets of big oil simply makes you look gullible. I don't agree that alternative energy is always the best choice but sometimes it is.
The government needs to stop subsidizing alternative energy & instead reward the consumers who invest in alternative energy that works. Stop trying to penalize people for using too much energy or favoring sources through penalties & fees. How about instead we reward people through vouchers or tax write offs for investing in alternative energy that actually works. Let the market pick solutions that work instead of pouring money into solutions that don't.
And for crying out loud, start building some nuclear power plants, we've come a long way with nuclear technology since the days of 3 mile island. Heck we even have submarines powered by it now, not to mention ~80% of the president's beloved France.
The government needs to stop subsidizing alternative energy & instead reward the consumers who invest in alternative energy that works.
I'd be OK with that - as long as they stop subsidizing fossil fuel and nuclear energy, as well.
I think you may want to think of this in a completely different way:
Maybe this is one large scale laboratory that will be used to practically develope alternative power.
If apple uses its resources including funding and ability to manufacture and produce a more efficient and affordable alternative power system available for everyone, the would have not only made an important contribution to Mankind but also has the potential of freeing the world on its dependence on petroleum. In turn it will be the most powerful entity on the planet
I agree, although I don't see Apple getting into the energy business. If Apple did make a major leap in the development of practical renewal power, that would do more to "change the world" than any computer they ever made. If Apple was successful at this, can you imagine if everyone who attempts to copy Apple today, attempted to copy them at this - where it would become "unhip" or "politically incorrect" to build or operate a factory that didn't use renewable power?
Having said that, I do have some of the concerns, as expressed by others, about clear-cutting the land to obtain the goal. I would have felt a lot better if this was an abandoned factory or shopping center. And I am hoping that the solar farm and "gas factory" does produce far more than 10% of the necessary power. I also question, as others have, why a great number of solar panels couldn't be placed on top of these facilities, rather than on new land, but obviously, we don't know the full plan as yet.
As for nuclear energy, it doesn't matter what the reality is - nuclear energy is dead. You're not going to see any new reactors anywhere, except perhaps in places like North Korea or eventually Iran (if Israel doesn't bomb it first) - places where the people have no say whatsoever. I don't even think you'll see new reactors built in China. What you are going to see is tons of reactors decommissioned in coming years, especially in Europe, even if that does have an overall negative impact on the environment as countries return to coal and other dirtier sources of fuel.
Fourth, if you consider the purpose of a charity is to 'spread happiness', Apple does that quite well.
Now THAT is some clear thinking! To expand on it:
Some charities want to bring good things to life. So GE is the world's bestest charity!
And Coke too! A Coke and a Smile! Charities like to make people smile! Coca-Cola: A wonderful Charity!
So people can either contribute to the Red Cross or the March of Dimes, or as an alternative, they can simply buy another iPad! Same thing!
/s
As for nuclear energy, it doesn't matter what the reality is - nuclear energy is dead. You're not going to see any new reactors anywhere, except perhaps in places like North Korea .....
I guess the 60 reactors being built must be happening on Venus. /s
You should read a bit before you post.
Here, let me help: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...284295880.html