Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) Has Secretly Improved the Green Energy Requirements, According to Greenpeace

 By: on Jul 13,2012 Posted in Business News ,Technology
Share |
We're on   

Greenpeace used to give Apple Inc (AAPL) D’s and F’s. In a report released on Thursday, Greenpeace says it’s pleased to announce that Apple Inc (AAPL) has promised to move its data centers to renewable green energy sources, such as wind power, solar, and hydro-electric dams. But Greenpeace still wants to know how Apple intends to do this in its data center design.

Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) did not immediately respond to a request for comment but in the past, it has said many times that its computing facilities will be powered entirely by renewable sources by early next year. The message is that Apple Inc (AAPL)’s $1bn data center in Maiden, North Carolina is currently plugged into the Duke Energy power grid, whose power sources are somewhat clean but not exactly 100 percent clean.

Apple Inc. is already building a 100-acre plant of solar array and biogas energy in Maiden, but it does not seem that these can power the entire facility.

Greenpeace spokesman David Pomerantz says, “[The move to renewable sources] all sounds great, and we’re super pumped about that, but when you get into the analysis and actually look at it, there are some big holes in what they’re doing and how they’re going to get there that they haven’t revealed yet. Without that, there are some pretty big issues that they’re going to have to resolve, and we’re wondering how they’re going to do that.”

All the big tech players like Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) , Google Inc (NASDAQ:GOOG) and, Inc.(NASDAQ:AMZN) have already expanded their infrastructure supporting Greenpeace, who has kept a close watch on how the world’s data centers are powered and how these facilities are generally affecting the environment. Earlier this year, Google Inc topped the Greenpeace “Cool IT Leaderboard,” which ranks the performance of the big IT players in this area.

Apple Inc said it would move its facilities to 100 percent renewable energy, but Greenpeace is annoyed with the offensive response of the company, as it hasn’t said exactly how it will move away from things like coal power.

Greenpeace latest report gives Apple a “C” in certain areas and a “D” in others, and it got a “D” for its secretive approach towards its plans.



5 Responses to “Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) Has Secretly Improved the Green Energy Requirements, According to Greenpeace”

  1. Solo Interface says:

    A true character  of Green Piece can be gleaned from their giving a D to Apple.  Although they do not initiate force to motivate compliance, like the state Green Piece has an air of authority and wants a subject to act in accordance with a true or false respect for it.  That just may be their true agenda.  Green Piece didn’t invent respect for environment nor like the state are they producers.  Apple is a producer and the nature of their products and the lifestyle they promote compared to what existed before is WAY green.  Because of Apple’s products many of us work at home.  My commute is down my hallway.  Who are the real environmentalists?  Defense rests. 

  2. Jeff says:

    What are you talking about? The only thing I understood in that whole message is ‘defense rests’ Apple’s products are not the only solution to work from home, and other producers are able to get much higher grades. I am a huge apple supporter but your statement makes no sense.

    • Solo Interface says:

      Sorry Jeff.  I love Apple too.  I sometimes assume too much. Maybe the following will be more clear.
      When one is confronted by a cop, a boarder guard, a tax collector and the like, one is being confronted by ‘the state’.  ‘The state’ doesn’t produce anything yet they compel one to act in accord with their wishes because of their ability to ‘initiate force’ (Rand, 1957).  In simple terms — they have a gun.  In practice, when we are confronted by a state bureaucrat, it is best to behave as if we like, agree and respect them so that we get off easy.  No gun is drawn.  No fine is imposed.  Doesn’t always work however.
      Apple computer, however, uses no gun.  Apple computer compels us by offering something that each of us as individuals decide is good for us.  And more importantly, we can walk away from the deal if we don’t like, agree, or respect Apple.  (Try walking away from a cop or tax collector you don’t agree with.)  Apple has no ability to ‘initiate force.’  Although Green piece can’t ‘initiate force’ they, like ‘the state’, don’t produce anything either — and this is my point → they demand this same false respect that we give to ‘the state’ by giving a D to a company for lack of acknowledgement.  For lack of concession that Green Peace should be in control.  Maybe Apple knows what they’ve done.  The company’s founder brought about the whole desk-top life style, a decidedly green way of life that puts all the states efforts and rabble rousing groups like Green Peace to shame.  Why is this right? – because ‘the state’ and Green Piece are not producers and solutions to problems, ALL PROBLEMS. comes from invention, innovation and production, not attenuation. confiscation and defamation.  If this slant is new to you, know that it’s not to many of us who are worried about the public sector swamping the private sector and groups like Green Peace playing into this.  There true agenda may not be what we think. 
      By the way.  Steve is gone now but new invention, innovation and production is continuing in other places that is positive for the environment and is proving my point.  Check out Elon Musk and his three companies, SpaceX, Tesla and SolarCity. .  I bought Apple Stock at $7 when Steve came back to the company.  I just bought stock in Tesla – we’ll see.  If you see some light in this I know you’ll love Apple even more.  Good Luck.

  3. Ed says:

    Greenpeace ought to be seeking to recognize companies such as Apple for their efforts to reduce impact the on environment.  Instead, their approach seems to be more concerned with an arbitrary assessment that itself is not based on open and transparent standards.   It is troubling that they would think to give a company that has invested in green solutions the way Apple has a D or F, but it is just as troubling that it is covered here.  Sounds almost a bit childish and as though they are pouting because they didn’t get access to Apple internal information.  Really, I would just assume that Apple not accept the risk associated with providing details of its energy plan to who knows who.  Greenpeace should be able to do its work without those details — if it truly seeks to help.       

  4. Pip says:

    Once great Greenpeace has no credibility any more. They just want maximum contributions to their “charity”. They repeatedly criticise Apple when other companies and industries are far far worse. People who buy Apple products are middle class with a conscience, and therefore a prime target for Greenpeace to extract guilt payments.

    There is objective scientific evaluation to be done, but Greenpeace has unfortunately become just another snake oil salesman delivering fake pseudo-scientific reports.

Leave a Reply