Apple building 171 acre solar panel farm to power NC data center

Apple plans to further increase the eco-friendliness of its $1 billion data center in North Carolina by building a solar panel farm across the street.

<a href='http://meincmagazine.com/apple/news/2011/10/apple-building-171-acre-solar-panel-farm-to-power-nc-data-center.ars'>Read the whole story</a>

 

[boots]

"Apple servers - powered by Sun"

 

[openaperture]

Can't help but think of the Death Star trench run.

Good job Apple.

 

[cryptonym]

Acre? Square foot? Are we posting from Middle-earth?

 

[Rene Gollent]

Acre? Square foot? Are we posting from Middle-earth?

The U.S. still uses imperial units.

 

[Tundro Walker]

They must be getting some kind of subsidy or something for this. A company wouldn't just sink tons of money into a solar array just to shut some greenpeacers up. Tons of folks have chatted up the cost/benefit of solar, and it still seems cost-prohibitive these days; you recoup your investment so far down the road that it's almost laughable.

I'm curious...why don't they just toss the solar panels on top of the data center building?

 

[SirOmega]

170 acres could yield them about 20MW if they go for a high density solution (e.g. not thin film but 19-20% efficient crystalline solar PV). Plus another few MW if they put them on top of the building too.

I don't know how much power the building uses though.

 

[foresmac108]

Acre? Square foot? Are we posting from Middle-earth?

Yes. For those outside Middle Earth that lack access to google or a calculator:

500,000 sq ft = 46,500 m2
171 acres = 692,000 m2

 

[markstewart]

They must be getting some kind of subsidy or something for this. A company wouldn't just sink tons of money into a solar array just to shut some greenpeacers up. Tons of folks have chatted up the cost/benefit of solar, and it still seems cost-prohibitive these days; you recoup your investment so far down the road that it's almost laughable.

Apple has so much cash sitting around that as long as they eventually recoup the cash its a better investment than the 1 or 2 percent they're getting letting it sit around in short term investments.

 

[Specop_007]

I wonder if the whole green movement takes into account the processes and materials used to create these fantastic solar panels, batteries and other "environmentally friendly" objects.

 

[jdgiotta]

Ah, but the question is, will they patent it?

 

[aoeu]

I wonder if the whole green movement takes into account the processes and materials used to create these fantastic solar panels, batteries and other "environmentally friendly" objects.

Why don't you go ask the 'whole green movement' instead of wondering aloud?

 

[DriverGuru]

I'm curious...why don't they just toss the solar panels on top of the data center building?

Because that won't produce enough power. Typical commercial panels are 1.5 square meters and produce a little over 200 watts under best sun conditions in the southwest.

Even if you could get 100% efficient cells, which of course you cannot, you can only get about 1 KW/square meter (about 11 square feet) from the sun, and that only during the peak of the day under clear blue skies in the southwest, not North Carolina.

It is trivial to imagine that 1 square meter of data center can easily contain equipment that uses more than 1 kW, let alone 133 watts.

 

[Specop_007]

I wonder if the whole green movement takes into account the processes and materials used to create these fantastic solar panels, batteries and other "environmentally friendly" objects.

Why don't you go ask the 'whole green movement' instead of wondering aloud?

The answer is pretty clear. I think if they had given it thought the green movement would probably die out. Or certainly at least fade a bit in its intensity. But facts and logic rarely weigh in on emotional matters and really thats what this movement strikes me as.

 

[D3ADP0OL]

In other news, Apple is also building human-sized hamster wheels to power their outsourced sweatshops in China. If the "wheel-operators" would like to listen to one of the iPods their effort is helping to build while they run, one may be purchased by deducting 80% of their weekly $1 wages for the next 375 weeks.

 

[killing_time]

didnt see that coming.

 

[foresmac108]

I'm curious...why don't they just toss the solar panels on top of the data center building?

As doormat noted, they could only generate a small portion of the energy a 171 acre farm could. There may be other construction/code related issues to putting such an array on the roof as well. Hard to say without direct information from Apple, which so far isn't forthcoming.

 

[DriverGuru]

170 acres could yield them about 20MW if they go for a high density solution (e.g. not thin film but 19-20% efficient crystalline solar PV).

Nope. 170 acres = about 700,000 square meters. See above. 700 KW at most at 100%, assuming the site was moved to the Arizona desert and you only count the peak of the day.

 

[clackerd]

I wonder if the whole green movement takes into account the processes and materials used to create these fantastic solar panels, batteries and other "environmentally friendly" objects.

Why don't you go ask the 'whole green movement' instead of wondering aloud?

The answer is pretty clear. I think if they had given it thought the green movement would probably die out. Or certainly at least fade a bit in its intensity. But facts and logic rarely weigh in on emotional matters and really thats what this movement strikes me as.

I agree with you that Apple should have just built a coal power plant since the green movement is based entirely on emotional matters.

 

[Demani]

I wonder if the whole green movement takes into account the processes and materials used to create these fantastic solar panels, batteries and other "environmentally friendly" objects.

Why don't you go ask the 'whole green movement' instead of wondering aloud?

The answer is pretty clear. I think if they had given it thought the green movement would probably die out. Or certainly at least fade a bit in its intensity. But facts and logic rarely weigh in on emotional matters and really thats what this movement strikes me as.

And "strikes me" implies that your perception isn't based on facts or logic either. I can say that many of the estimates do take into account the costs of the materials involved, as well as the knock-on benefits that cleaner energy can provide (do cheap energy advocates calculate the damage to drinking water and and medical costs due to increased airborne pollutants in their "cheaper" costs?).

Solar in small pockets is less efficient, but something large-ish like this is likely being done because it has a measurable value to the company (they don't spend that kind of money on whims), and likely will help ensure that they don't face any brownouts during hot sunny summer days.

This does make me wonder though: why don't states like Minnesota, Montana and North Dakota end up being a hotbed for data centers? Is it just network backbone connectivity? Seems like not needing to spend so much on cooling would be a good thing, not to mention land costs tend to be lower.

 

[Leiesoldat]

Despite this, Greenpeace criticized the fact that the area of North Carolina where it is located has one of the "dirtiest [power] generation mixes in the US," a combination of coal and nuclear power.

Greenpeace can suck it. Unless they come up with an actual alternative to the cleanest fuel source we have right now (nuclear, relatively speaking in terms of size and cost-benefit analysis) and a timely and cost effective way to deploy it, they need to shut their traps instead of whining about it.

 

[foresmac108]

In other news, Apple is also building human-sized hamster wheels to power their outsourced sweatshops in China. If the "wheel-operators" would like to listen to one of the iPods their effort is helping to build while they run, one may be purchased by deducting 80% of their weekly $1 wages for the next 375 weeks.

Are you posting this comment from your 100% American made computer, with all the parts and final assembly done by workers earning a living wage with full health care benefits?

 

[dr_buzzsaw]

I wonder if the whole green movement takes into account the processes and materials used to The answer is pretty clear. I think if they had given it thought the green movement would probably die out. Or certainly at least fade a bit in its intensity. But facts and logic rarely weigh in on emotional matters and really thats what this movement strikes me as.

The total life cycle environmental costs of all renewable sources have been well stuided. PV was a net loser 15 years ago but it had gotten much, much better. As my primary source is Ars I'm not going to bother citing specific articles. If you cared about facts you would look the articles up yourself.

However since the emotional and fact free thinking here is mostly yours I doubt you'll bother.

 

[killing_time]

I agree with you that Apple should have just built a coal power plant since the green movement is based entirely on emotional matters.

coal might be extreme but i dont see why they can't start fracking large areas of North Carolina.

 

[EBone]

170 acres could yield them about 20MW if they go for a high density solution (e.g. not thin film but 19-20% efficient crystalline solar PV).

Nope. 170 acres = about 700,000 square meters. See above. 700 KW at most at 100%, assuming the site was moved to the Arizona desert and you only count the peak of the day.

I build commercial scale renewable power plants for a living. 175 acres of modern PV panes will generate approximately 25-30 megawatts of energy at peak output. One megawatt will power around 350 average-sized US homes, so we're talking about enough energy to power at least 9,000 homes at peak output. That's definitely going to take a huge bite out of the data center's utility bill. Excess power generated during sunny times can be sold back to the grid, which will also help offset overall electric costs.

 

[cubemoss]

Greenpeace can suck it. Unless they come up with an actual alternative to the cleanest fuel source we have right now (nuclear, relatively speaking in terms of size and cost-benefit analysis) and a timely and cost effective way to deploy it, they need to shut their traps instead of whining about it.

Remind me again how your ilk consider nuclear energy to be clean? Is it because you can somehow block the carcinogenic waste product with a half-life of multiple hundreds of thousands of years out of your mind?

 

[Nabu the Wise]

In other news, Apple is also building human-sized hamster wheels to power their outsourced sweatshops in China. If the "wheel-operators" would like to listen to one of the iPods their effort is helping to build while they run, one may be purchased by deducting 80% of their weekly $1 wages for the next 375 weeks.

So, I can extrapolate from your statement that the reason HP is trying to get out of the desktop business is that they realized the human suffering they were causing by being the largest desktop manufacturer?

For that matter, I'm sure that the Dell sweatshops aren't nearly as nice, but getting an old, refurbished Jukebox player is much cheaper - it only takes three weeks or so to afford one.

I get the fact that you don't like Apple, but don't try to pretend that everyone else is cute and cuddly.

 

[Andrewcw]

They must be getting some kind of subsidy or something for this. A company wouldn't just sink tons of money into a solar array just to shut some greenpeacers up. Tons of folks have chatted up the cost/benefit of solar, and it still seems cost-prohibitive these days; you recoup your investment so far down the road that it's almost laughable.

I'm curious...why don't they just toss the solar panels on top of the data center building?

They might be getting some. But the real subsidy are the stockholders/people buying products. They just need to make more iPads to make up for the cost. This is a PR investment just think of this as one large superbowl ad.

And this is to someone who knows more about the power grid. Lets say they did build this massive Solar farm in the middle of the desert and used the Power grid to transfer the power directly. Would the loss of power due to distance offset be greater than just building the panels in a crappy area?

 

[BC_Sizemo]

170 acres could yield them about 20MW if they go for a high density solution (e.g. not thin film but 19-20% efficient crystalline solar PV).

Nope. 170 acres = about 700,000 square meters. See above. 700 KW at most at 100%, assuming the site was moved to the Arizona desert and you only count the peak of the day.

EBone is right, your decimal is in the wrong place:

170 acres ~ 700,000 square meters. 100% efficiency ~ 1kw/sq meter
700,000 * 1,000 = 700,000,000 watts = 700,000 KW = 700 MW
At 10% efficiency you get 70 MW.

That's still a good chunk of land, roughly 3000 feet on each side.

 

[sf5xeplus]

Whilst we're on the subject of coal vs. nuclear etc - I wonder (even when excluding manufacturing) if solar has a positive or negative effect on global warming -

*In negative - they increase the albedo to ~100% - not good
*In positive - you're not burning coal..

Compare with wind - which generates power from an energy source that is already thermally degraded - no increase in net energy input to the earth..

Please feel free to demolish

 

[Argosy]

I wonder if the whole green movement takes into account the processes and materials used to create these fantastic solar panels, batteries and other "environmentally friendly" objects.

Why don't you go ask the 'whole green movement' instead of wondering aloud?

The answer is pretty clear. I think if they had given it thought the green movement would probably die out. Or certainly at least fade a bit in its intensity. But facts and logic rarely weigh in on emotional matters and really thats what this movement strikes me as.

And "strikes me" implies that your perception isn't based on facts or logic either. I can say that many of the estimates do take into account the costs of the materials involved, as well as the knock-on benefits that cleaner energy can provide (do cheap energy advocates calculate the damage to drinking water and and medical costs due to increased airborne pollutants in their "cheaper" costs?).

Solar in small pockets is less efficient, but something large-ish like this is likely being done because it has a measurable value to the company (they don't spend that kind of money on whims), and likely will help ensure that they don't face any brownouts during hot sunny summer days.

This does make me wonder though: why don't states like Minnesota, Montana and North Dakota end up being a hotbed for data centers? Is it just network backbone connectivity? Seems like not needing to spend so much on cooling would be a good thing, not to mention land costs tend to be lower.

Yea that was my thought exactly. Put this thing in Minnesota, attach a green house and grow tomatoes in the middle of winter (well okay not enough daylight for tomatoes, but you get my drift). At least for part of the year, your cooling would be 'free'. I mean it costs how much to cool a building that size in NC in the middle of summer even if the contents of the building weren't generating heat!!

Argosy

 

[abj]

Greenpeace can suck it. Unless they come up with an actual alternative to the cleanest fuel source we have right now (nuclear, relatively speaking in terms of size and cost-benefit analysis) and a timely and cost effective way to deploy it, they need to shut their traps instead of whining about it.

Remind me again how your ilk consider nuclear energy to be clean? Is it because you can somehow block the carcinogenic waste product with a half-life of multiple hundreds of thousands of years out of your mind?

If something has a halflife of 100k years its really not doing much in terms of radioactivity.

 

[BadSuperblock]

I wonder if the whole green movement takes into account the processes and materials used to create these fantastic solar panels, batteries and other "environmentally friendly" objects.

If they do...then the next logical step is to encourage companies, especially the very richest ones like Apple, to do exactly what they're doing.

Because the only way we're gonna get cleaner, greener processes and materials for solar panels etc. is by iterating and refining, and the best way to fund that is through product sales, and the best way to sell is to those who can most afford to subsidize the higher early-adopter prices for less efficient equipment, and that means companies like Apple. We need rich companies like Apple to pour money into those manufacturers so they can fund the R&D to make cleaner, cheaper, and more efficient solar panels and batteries. That is, if you believe in capitalism, if you don't want people to expect government to fund it.

It's the same reason I need all you affluent techies to keep early-adopting leading-edge gadgets so that the price comes down and performance/value go up to where we in the masses can afford to buy the later versions.

Clean, efficient, high-performance gasoline engines didn't just happen...the first cars were slow, noisy, smelly pieces of crap.

 

[carlisimo]

They must be getting some kind of subsidy or something for this. A company wouldn't just sink tons of money into a solar array just to shut some greenpeacers up. Tons of folks have chatted up the cost/benefit of solar, and it still seems cost-prohibitive these days; you recoup your investment so far down the road that it's almost laughable.

I'm curious...why don't they just toss the solar panels on top of the data center building?

PV doesn’t tend to save a whole lot of money yet, but it usually breaks even before the panels have lost enough effectiveness to need replacing. It’s also a good hedge against any increases in the price of electricity. As for the roof of the building, besides being too small it’s not always easy to install the panels on a building that’s already completed and in use. Roofers hate when you poke holes (to anchor the panels to structure) due to the potential for leaks, the building may not have been designed for the additional weight, and the roof is probably already full of HVAC equipment, ducts, and pipes.

 

[carlisimo]

*In negative - they increase the albedo to ~100% - not good
...
Please feel free to demolish

I think you have albedo backwards.

 

[sethdayal]

Greenpeace can suck it. Unless they come up with an actual alternative to the cleanest fuel source we have right now (nuclear, relatively speaking in terms of size and cost-benefit analysis) and a timely and cost effective way to deploy it, they need to shut their traps instead of whining about it.

Remind me again how your ilk consider nuclear energy to be clean? Is it because you can somehow block the carcinogenic waste product with a half-life of multiple hundreds of thousands of years out of your mind?

Wind/solar with associated filthy fast spooling low efficiency load balancing gas plant produces more GHG's and deadly air pollution than it saves. Replacing it with high efficiency slow spooling gas plant, actually produces less green house gases less pollution at a much lower cost. Better to skip the wind and built the CCGT plant instead.

To be truly green Apple simply needs to contact for all its power from a local clean and green zero environment footprint nuke plant.

All the worlds nuclear waste now perfectly contained would fill 1% the volume of the Great Pyramid at Giza which has lasted 5000 years - less than a football field buried 40 feet deep. Not waste. It is fuel enough to power the world for a thousand years while being destroyed in gen IV reactors like India's new 500 MW first of 5 units. Ironically that is the only way to get rid of it. The tiny amount left is such a low level it can be returned to the mine shaft.

 

[sf5xeplus]

*In negative - they increase the albedo to ~100% - not good
...
Please feel free to demolish

I think you have albedo backwards.

Yes you're right. Now demolish properly.

 

[whquaint]

I wonder if the whole green movement takes into account the processes and materials used to create these fantastic solar panels, batteries and other "environmentally friendly" objects.

Because coal and nuclear plants are made out of lollipops and daisies, right?
The #1 ingredient in a solar panel is .... sand! Ah! Run for your life!
They will use no batteries. Solar farms like this connect to the grid. I'm sure Apple already has plenty of battery backup for their servers anyway.

coal might be extreme but i dont see why they can't start fracking large areas of North Carolina.

Because my drinking water supply, Jordan Lake, sits right on top of the proposed fracking site. I don't want their poisonous chemicals pumped under my drinking water.

The business case for Apple is easy. Companies do this all the time for the publicity. It makes Apple look good. Also, the NC utilities have a renewable energy mandate to meet, so Duke Energy may be working with Apple on this.

 

[jb510]

I wonder if the whole green movement takes into account the processes and materials used to create these fantastic solar panels, batteries and other "environmentally friendly" objects.

Opposed to the materials that go into building and feeding a coal power plant? You're funny!

I too was wondering why they weren't using the roof, but the math makes sense... Still hoping they use the roof to minimize offisite impacts.

As for data centers built in colder climes, Ars did an articleaim a geothermal powered data center in Iceland: http://meincmagazine.com/business/news/20 ... r-that.ars

 

[jb510]

All the worlds nuclear waste now perfectly contained would fill 1% the volume of the Great Pyramid at Giza which has lasted 5000 years - less than a football field buried 40 feet deep. Not waste. It is fuel enough to power the world for a thousand years while being destroyed in gen IV reactors like India's new 500 MW first of 5 units. Ironically that is the only way to get rid of it. The tiny amount left is such a low level it can be returned to the mine shaft.

What would happen if you took that same quantity of nuclear waste and spread it evenly over the surface of the earth? (I'm seriously asking this as I have no idea and am curious).