Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Earth Power Apple

Apple: Greenpeace's Cloud Critique Driven By Bogus Numbers 188

miller60 writes "Apple says Greenpeace has wildly overestimated the amount of power it uses in its data center in North Carolina, and used that bad math to give the company a low grade on sustainability. Apple says it uses 20 megawatts of power at its iDataCenter, a fraction of Greenpeace's estimate of 100 megawatts in a new report on energy use by cloud computing providers. Apple says that its huge solar array and biogas-powered fuel cell will supply 60 percent of the facility's power, not the 10 percent claimed by Greenpeace."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple: Greenpeace's Cloud Critique Driven By Bogus Numbers

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 18, 2012 @02:38PM (#39725751)

    Greenpeace: "Here are some numbers we pulled out of our asses -- I mean, 'estimated'. Apple is bad."
    Apple: "Here are the actual numbers."

  • Re:Excellent... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 18, 2012 @02:45PM (#39725871)

    Greenpeace lied about Apple to get attention? No way! That's never happened before [roughlydrafted.com].

  • by cpu6502 ( 1960974 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2012 @03:17PM (#39726357)

    Greenpeace? Is this the same group that "rescues" animals from lab experiments or farm slaughterhouses, and then gasses them in a room (because they have no place to put these animals they "saved")? I recall the founder of Greenpeace now speaks-out against them.

  • by Sponge Bath ( 413667 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2012 @03:25PM (#39726499)
    That was PETA, but both organizations are full of fact averse nuts so I can see confusing them. Nothing undermines your cause like being associated with crazy behavior.
  • Re:Excellent... (Score:4, Informative)

    by xaxa ( 988988 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2012 @04:32PM (#39727465)

    For several years in a row when the Wii was at it's popularity peak, the greenpeace "report card" gave Nintendo a failing grade

    Do you own a Wii and a power consumption meter? I do (my electricity supplier gave me the meter, the government required it. It's supposed to help people reduce consumption).

    Anyway, the Wii uses about 10-15W while on standby (I can't remember how much exactly). That's a huge amount, compared to almost everything else in the house. My bedroom is lit with less power!

  • by cheesecake23 ( 1110663 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2012 @04:50PM (#39727665)

    Who modded this clown up? Almost every statement he makes is plain wrong.

    I know my experience with meeting Greenpace activists in
    Toronto in the 1980's -- all excited by Fuel Cell Technology
    could not comprehend that the Hydrogen Economy relied
    on having abundant Nuclear Energy. They were not the
    brightest lot on the block.

    The activists were right, you were wrong. The hydrogen economy doesn't require nuclear. Renewables would do equally well. Electrolyzers aren't very expensive per kilowatt and can run on intermittent electricity. Hydrogen is often pushed as a possible way of solving the whole intermittency issue for solar and wind power.

    They also did not seem to understand that Wind Turbines
    are great bird whackers and kill more birds per year than
    lit up skyscrappers in Toronto.

    I don't know about Toronto but here are the stats for Denmark, which gets 25% of its electricity from wind power. They have about 30,000 annual bird deaths from wind turbines, 1 million from cars, 2 million from window collisions, and 5 million from cats.

    the fabrication of solar
    cells required extremely toxic chemicals such as Selinium
    and also required large tracts of land

    Yes, some types of solar cells use toxic chemicals, but so do lots of other industries. As long as they get recycled there's no huge problem with this. But other solar cell types only use silicon, which is 100% harmless. Land requirements are large compared to nuclear, but tiny compared to bioenergy. Solar cells on just a few percent of the world's deserts could supply all the energy we need, but they could also be distributed over other "dead" surfaces like rooftops, parking lots, roadsides, etc.

    From these people I met, if they were representative, I would
    be surprised that they could calculate any energy efficiencies.

    I'm an energy system researcher with no connection to Greenpeace, but the research reports they produce are very good. Did you hear about the recent IPCC "scandal" where some highlighted scenarios originated from a Greenpeace study? That wasn't because the IPCC is partisan, but that at least some parts of Greenpeace do impressive work that gets cited in academic studies.

    Like I said, they were not the brightest lot on the block. LoL

    ... naw, too easy.

  • Re:Excellent... (Score:5, Informative)

    by canajin56 ( 660655 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2012 @05:23PM (#39728103)
    It should be about 10W, and that's because you have it in Connect24 standby (orange light). Turn off Connect24 (which keeps USB and Wifi powered and connected to Nintendo's servers so you can get Nintendo messages, data updates for the weather channel and other apps like that, and messages from friends). Consumer reports found it uses ~10W in this mode, which is more than the 2-3W that other consoles use when "off". But if you disable it (can tell you did it right because the light goes red instead of orange when it turns off) it drops to 1.3W. On the other hand, the Wii uses 15-18W when on and playing games, compared to the 155-200W drawn by a PS3 or a 360.

1 Mole = 007 Secret Agents