4 ms·
Google is ahead of the game here. Other tech companies also are moving to renewables but they're not at 100% yet (IIRC). The key point is that as cloud computin
by deegles 10y ago
Google is ahead of the game here. Other tech companies also are moving to renewables but they're not at 100% yet (IIRC). The key point is that as cloud computing becomes commoditized and people build tools to quickly transfer from one cloud provider to another, the profit margin will become smaller and smaller until energy costs dominate the cost to provide a service. It is already the case that a machine will use more in energy costs than its capital cost over its lifetime.
So, whoever has the cheapest power will be able to provide cheapest services, or charge more for capacity located in more energy-expensive regions (for latency).
- rm_-rf_slash 10y agoPerhaps more importantly, because of the necessity for data centers to always be reliably online, this could help push for better grid-level energy storage solutions, the true Holy Grail of sustainable energy. Renewables are effectively second-class citizens in the energy world until they can match the reliable storage capacity available from dead dinosaur.
- JumpCrisscross 10y ago> whoever has the cheapest power will be able to provide cheapest services One of the reasons the UAE pitches itself as a data centre site.
- rshaban 10y agoYes, because servers love hot, humid, dusty climates!
- edblarney 10y ago"So, whoever has the cheapest power will be able to provide cheapest services" While it's a good point, I don't entirely agree with it. More apt: renewables are not cheap. They are very expensive in almost all parts of the Western world.
- coda_ 10y agoI agree that they are ahead of the game. Combined Cycle Gas Turbine generators are still the most economic way to produce electricity... though carbon tax and renewable subsidies do tip the scale in some markets. I don't think they are purely doing this for cheap electricity... at least not right now. I believe in what they are doing, and think it will help facilitate a transition to more efficient renewables eventually, but I don't believe they are doing this for the economic benefit right now... it's a good PR move that could also pay off financially in the long run... in my opinion.
- Someone 10y agoApple (smaller server park, but does that matter?) claims 93% over 2015, so they can't be far behind. http://images.apple.com/environment/pdf/Apple_Environmental_Responsibility_Report_2016.pdf http://images.apple.com/environment/pdf/Apple_Environmental_...: "For starters, as of January 2016, we’re sourcing or generating enough renewable energy to cover 93 percent of the electricity we use at our facilities worldwide. In fact, Apple is now 100 percent renewable in 23 countries, including China, Germany, Singapore, and the United States. We’re also 100 percent renewable at every one of our data centers. So whenever you send an iMessage, download a song from iTunes, or ask Siri a question, the energy Apple uses doesn’t contribute to climate change. In the past five years, we have reduced the carbon footprint of Apple facilities by 64 percent thanks to our clean energy use, avoiding over 1 million metric tons of carbon emissions. We’re working hard to reach 100 percent renewable energy for all of our facilities worldwide, and help our suppliers in China and everywhere around the world make the same transition to clean energy as we have."
- suppressingfire 10y agoCheck out the graph here: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-05/waging-america-s-wars-using-renewable-energy https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-05/waging-am... Yeah, they rank on the list, but they're pretty far behind.
- Someone 10y agoAs I said: “smaller server park, but does that matter?” I don’t think the thing to judge by is who consumes the most renewable energy.