3 ms·

You have it backwards. GWh/year is what matters. GW is just a max instantaneous power and is borderline meaningless as a decarbonization metric. X GWh/year mea

You have it backwards. GWh/year is what matters. GW is just a max instantaneous power and is borderline meaningless as a decarbonization metric. X GWh/year means that they produced x actual clean GWh of energy over a period of 1 year. X GW can mean they produced X GW of clean power for some arbitrary amount of time, like 1 hour or 1 week or 1 second.

Aachen 4y ago
Just like wind/sun/hydro won't produce the same number of GW at any given moment, wouldn't it be similarly silly to predict a GWh/year? It all depends on how many orders Apple places with the suppliers, how efficient they turn out to be in a given year (maybe they buy newer, more/less power-hungry machines in 2024), and indeed how much the sun shines and the rain falls. Having a capacity figure sounds roughly as meaningful to me as an average yearly production forecast. > some arbitrary amount of time, like 1 hour or 1 week or 1 second I think anyone would understand a vehicle going 200km/h to mean "at most, when you put in fuel". Not "for the next 1 hour right now specifically". Specifying how many km you're promising to drive the customer is a bit weird, one can assume Apple's commitment for the capacity figure is in perpetuity. It's a rare moment where I don't fully agree with a comment from acidburnNSA, and I really hate to be defending Apple and won't buy a device that isn't mine no matter how green the energy is (if they would do fair material sourcing, like Fairphone, that would honestly make me doubt my stance, but not the relatively easy decision to use green energy as one the richest companies on earth), but this skepticism that they might stop it before the year is out is also kind of weird.
ginko 4y ago
>GW is just a max instantaneous power That's one definition you can also use GW to specify average power over a year. 1 GWh/year is 1 GWh/8760h is ~114KW, the time element cancels out

Aachen 4y ago

Just like wind/sun/hydro won't produce the same number of GW at any given moment, wouldn't it be similarly silly to predict a GWh/year? It all depends on how many orders Apple places with the suppliers, how efficient they turn out to be in a given year (maybe they buy newer, more/less power-hungry machines in 2024), and indeed how much the sun shines and the rain falls. Having a capacity figure sounds roughly as meaningful to me as an average yearly production forecast. > some arbitrary amount of time, like 1 hour or 1 week or 1 second I think anyone would understand a vehicle going 200km/h to mean "at most, when you put in fuel". Not "for the next 1 hour right now specifically". Specifying how many km you're promising to drive the customer is a bit weird, one can assume Apple's commitment for the capacity figure is in perpetuity. It's a rare moment where I don't fully agree with a comment from acidburnNSA, and I really hate to be defending Apple and won't buy a device that isn't mine no matter how green the energy is (if they would do fair material sourcing, like Fairphone, that would honestly make me doubt my stance, but not the relatively easy decision to use green energy as one the richest companies on earth), but this skepticism that they might stop it before the year is out is also kind of weird.

ginko 4y ago

>GW is just a max instantaneous power That's one definition you can also use GW to specify average power over a year. 1 GWh/year is 1 GWh/8760h is ~114KW, the time element cancels out