Apple, Facebook, Google asked to pay for wind parks in Denmark

“Apple, Facebook, and Google are facing calls to help pay for wind parks needed to power their planned data centers in Denmark,” Christian Wienberg reports for Bloomberg.

“The companies have chosen the Nordic country, partly because of its abundant supply of green electricity,” Wienberg reports. “But a new report suggests that the data centers will consume so much power that local authorities may have to resort to more fossil fuels to cover demand.”

“The three U.S. tech giants have all said they want their centers to run on green energy and have published plans for wind parks. But the council said those plans still lack detail and a firm commitment. It’s also not clear if the new parks would draw on state subsidies,” Wienberg reports. “Apple is building a $1 billion data center in Denmark’s western city of Viborg, which once completed will be one of the world’s biggest. Facebook has plans for a center near the central city of Odense, while Google has bought land for a site in nearby Fredericia.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Wind parks for Denmark certainly sounds like something Apple would support.

SEE ALSO:
Apple adds Foxconn, chip suppliers to clean energy program – April 11, 2019
Geologist accuses Apple of political bias in removing ‘Inconvenient Facts’ climate change app – March 12, 2019
Apple thinks climate change will increase its brand value – January 23, 2019
Apple launches $300 million China Clean Energy Fund – July 13, 2018
Apple paves the way for breakthrough carbon-free aluminum smelting method – May 10, 2018
Apple now globally powered by 100 percent renewable energy – April 9, 2018
Apple to stick with environmental pledges despite President Trump’s gutting of Obama’s climate change orders – March 30, 2017
State-of-the-art floating solar island brings Apple’s clean energy program to Japan – March 8, 2017
Greenpeace: Apple again the world’s most environmentally friendly tech company – January 10, 2017
Apple continues supply chain transparency as Trump administration considers suspending conflict mineral requirements – March 27, 2017
Apple announces environmental progress in China; applauds supplier commitment to clean energy – August 17, 2016
Apple VP Jackson visits ‘solar mamas’ in Rajasthan – May 19, 2016
Apple will run all its operations in Singapore on solar power – November 17, 2015
Greenpeace: Apple is tech’s greenest – May 15, 2015
Greenpeace: Apple leading the way in creating a greener, more sustainable internet – April 2, 2014
Greenpeace praises Apple for reducing use of conflict minerals – February 13, 2014

18 Comments

  1. OK you guy’s, pony up some cash for our Green Energy Infrastructure.
    We totally support Green Energy…………….. Just as long as somebody else gets to flip for the bill.

    1. You didn’t bother to read past the headline did you? I guess it would not sell as well to state without spin that the big tech firms are seeking a public-private partnership that would bring online the megawatts of power that the companies will draw.

      I suppose you would be happier if the Danes just raised taxes so corporations could access socialist funded corporate welfare.

      Which is it?

    2. … the tech companies would not be paying for the power they use? And where?
      What I inferred from the article is that the Danes are not currently producing enough green energy to power the proposed data centers and would need to either spend extra to bring more on-line quickly or bring some retired fossil fuel energy sources back on-line to fill the need until the green-energy sources can ramp up in due course.
      Or … did I miss something?

      1. My impression was that since the companies have plans for wind parks, the intention was for each of them to build their own wind parks to supply power to their centers, not to sell to Denmark in general. This would make all the time those council members spent on the subject, a tempest in a teapot.

    1. I agree. Green energy is a hoax. There is only two ways to power the world 100%. We can use fossil fuel, or we can use Nuclear power. That is it ! There is no math in existence by anybody in the real energy business who says we can power the world with solar and wind. It’s fake. The oil companies love it when we say we will replace them with Solar and shut down the Nukes (their only true competitor).

      Anyone who is pro solar and wind, is also by default pro fossil fuel.

      It is about time we have an honest discussion. Do we want Fossil fuel or Nuclear power? Or do we want to continue pretending?

      1. Who says that anybody wants to generate 100% of electricity using any single source? You are posing a false dichotomy in which renewable sources are somehow illegitimate if they merely reduce dependence on fossil fuels. Denmark is largely reliant on renewables; there are days each year in which they are generating enough wind power to meet all their own needs and sell a substantial surplus to their neighbors. Every one of those kilowatts represents less pollution from stack gas and/or nuclear waste. There aren’t many windless days in that part of the world. For those occasions, there is North Sea natural gas to fire plants that only need to meet the shortfall. As battery tech improves, not even that will be necessary.

        1. “there are days each year in which they are generating enough wind power to meet all their own needs”

          This is not true. They don’t make there own steel, nor make their own cars so they are a net importer of energy. Using thousands of megawatts of other people’s energy to make your cars and steel, then giving back a few extra mega watts does not make you a net exporter of energy.

          Costa Rica makes the same bogus claim. I can say “hey, look at me. I don’t use any energy, can you heat my coffee for me, please?”

          It’s all bogus math.

            1. I work in the energy business, I’ve done the math. So has everyone in the business. It is an open secret that if you are pro solar you are pro fossil fuel.

              There are only two ways we can power our world 100%. We can obviously do it with Fossil fuel, and we can do it with Nuclear Power and electric cards. Either one has the capacity (with changes) to power our world 100%.

              There is no math in existence that shows you can do it with renewables.

              Indian Point Nuclear facility about 2100 MegaWatts running 24/7. Two Reactors.

              The largest solar array in the USA:

              Rosamond, California 579 MW capacity; completed June 2015. Currently also the world’s largest solar farm, it has 1.7 million solar panels spread over 3,200 acres (1,300 hectares).

              How much power at night? Hmmm.

              Average output 30% factoring in day/night and season so if you had zero resistance batteries (doesn’t exist) then it’s 24/7 output would be 200 megawatt. (actually it is way less using known physics). So you need 10 of these to be equivalent to Indian Point (which is being shut down by the “greeners” over the next 2 years and ALL of it’s power is being replaced with Natural Gas. Hmmm.

              Where is this green energy you mention. You should send that article to Governor Cuomo. He promised Green Energy but can’t deliver. You do the research.

      2. … anybody in the real energy business” … seriously? You expect someone in the energy business to promote Green Energy? And maybe you expect someone in th tobacco industry to tell you smoking promotes cancer, someone in the sugar industry to mention that sugar contains no nutritive value, is addictive, and makes you fat? Look up “naive” in the dictionary.

        1. I worked at Indian Point Nuclear reactor in the 80’s and I also did pipeline natural gas programming. I know something about this. I have no vested interested in making things up. I have children and grandchildren.

          If we put solar panels on every roof in America it still wouldn’t make a difference. Let’s do a little math.
          the average modern solar panel 225 watts during peak sun.
          Average roof 25 panels = 5625 Watts. Enough to power about 5 blow dryers during peak. Can you heat your home with that? No.
          That is why they never remove your heat and hot water when they put your solar panels up. So it gives all the power you need except for the thing that consumes the most power.
          …and the power drops down to zero at night!

          How about mining the metals that go into the panels. Manufacturing? Melting Aluminum frames at 1600 degrees.
          What about the metal scaffolding that is used to hold them up.
          Shipping, trucks and workmen driving around installing them.

          How many millions of MegaWatts of energy would it take in our hypothetical “install on every roof” will it take? Will our 5 blow dryers of power in the afternoon ever pay that back the energy debt it took to make them?

          Hint: Back in the 80’s Alcoa Aluminum was a DIRECT hook up client for energy to Indian Point Nuclear Reactor. Hmmm.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.