Environment & Energy

NickB79

(19,258 posts) Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:09 PM Apr 2012

Online Cloud Services Rely on Coal or Nuclear Power, Report Says

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/business/energy-environment/cloud-services-rely-on-coal-or-nuclear-power-greenpeace-says.html?_r=1

The infrastructure that supports the Internet, online commerce and nearly all corporate data services is engaged in a vast migration eastward in search of energy prices cheaper than anything available in Silicon Valley, where the digital revolution began, according to a report released Tuesday by the environmental group Greenpeace.

Internet companies often cloak themselves in an image of environmental awareness. But some companies that essentially live on the Internet are moving facilities to North Carolina, Virginia, northeastern Illinois and other regions whose main sources of energy are coal and nuclear power, the report said. The report singles out Apple as one of the leaders of the charge to coal-fired energy.

13 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Online Cloud Services Rely on Coal or Nuclear Power, Report Says (Original Post) NickB79 Apr 2012 OP

Direct link to Greenpeace report that the article is about. kristopher Apr 2012 #1

Thanks! nt NickB79 Apr 2012 #2

Another reason to stay out of the cloud. qb Apr 2012 #3

Google is expanding their presence here in Pryor Ok. madokie Apr 2012 #4

Most of the power is from hydro, in Oklahoma? NickB79 Apr 2012 #5

I was talking about here where I live not the whole state madokie Apr 2012 #6

Ah, cool. NickB79 Apr 2012 #7

Eastern part of the state is the foot hills of the ozark mountains madokie Apr 2012 #9

Sorry to inform you - WRONG AGAIN!!! PamW Apr 2012 #8

Interesting data at that link ... Nihil Apr 2012 #10

For starters dude it is neither dark nor toxic here madokie Apr 2012 #11

Unless Google's buildings are plugged directly into a dam, PamW has a point NickB79 Apr 2012 #12

C'mon ... anything that is 57% coal and 37% Natural Gas is pretty dark & toxic ... Nihil Apr 2012 #13

kristopher

(29,798 posts)

1. Direct link to Greenpeace report that the article is about.

Reply to NickB79 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:15 PM

Apr 2012

Executive Summary

Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Google, and Yahoo – these global brands and a host of other IT companies are rapidly and fundamentally transforming the way in which we work, communicate, watch movies or TV, listen to music, and share pictures through “the cloud.” The growth and scale of investment in the cloud is truly mind-blowing, with estimates of a 50-fold increase in the amount of digital information by 2020 and nearly half a trillion in investment in the coming year, all to create and feed our desire for ubiquitous access to infinite information from our computers, phones and other mobile devices, instantly.

The engine that drives the cloud is the data center. Data centers are the factories of the 21st century information age, containing thousands of computers that store and manage our rapidly growing collection of data for consumption at a moment’s notice. These cloud data centers, many of which can be seen from space, consume a tremendous amount of electricity; some consume the equivalent of nearly 180,000 homes. Unfortunately, despite the tremendous innovation they contain and the clean- energy potential they possess, most IT companies are rapidly expanding without considering how their choice of energy could impact society.

Given the energy-intensive nature of maintaining the cloud, access to significant amounts of electricity is a key factor in decisions about where to build these data centers. Since electricity plays a critical role in the cost structure of companies that use the cloud, there have been dramatic strides made in improving the energy efficiency design of the facilities and the thousands of computers that go inside. However, despite significant improvements in efficiency, the exponential growth in cloud computing far outstrips these energy savings. Companies must look not only at how efficiently they are consuming electricity, but also the sources of electricity that they are choosing.

This year’s report provides an updated and expanded look at the energy choices some of the largest and fastest growing IT companies are making as the race to build the cloud creates a new era of technology. These energy choices are completely invisible to consumers as we continue to rely more and more on our online world, but in places where the cloud touches the ground, these investments are having a very significant and rapidly growing impact in the offline world.

http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/publications/Campaign-reports/Climate-Reports/How-Clean-is-Your-Cloud/

NickB79

(19,258 posts)

2. Thanks! nt

Reply to kristopher (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:20 PM

Apr 2012

qb

(5,924 posts)

3. Another reason to stay out of the cloud.

Reply to NickB79 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 04:29 PM

Apr 2012

madokie

(51,076 posts)

4. Google is expanding their presence here in Pryor Ok.

Reply to NickB79 (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 04:54 PM

Apr 2012

A couple weeks ago Google announced that they were adding a whole new building stuffed full of personal computers at their data center down the road from here a couple miles
Our power is mostly from hydro, then coal and gas. No nuclear killie watts around here

NickB79

(19,258 posts)

5. Most of the power is from hydro, in Oklahoma?

Reply to madokie (Reply #4)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 02:13 PM

Apr 2012

I thought that sounded really weird, so I checked the US Dept. of Energy: http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/states/electricity.cfm/state=OK

As of 2005, coal and nat. gas made up 94% of Oklahoma's electrical generation, with hydro coming in at 4%.

madokie

(51,076 posts)

6. I was talking about here where I live not the whole state

Reply to NickB79 (Reply #5)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 02:39 PM

Apr 2012

We have 4 big dams and a pumped back storage lake for peak.

NickB79

(19,258 posts)

7. Ah, cool.

Reply to madokie (Reply #6)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 02:49 PM

Apr 2012

I didn't know OK had enough elevation change to maintain viable hydro.

madokie

(51,076 posts)

9. Eastern part of the state is the foot hills of the ozark mountains

Reply to NickB79 (Reply #7)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 09:09 PM

Apr 2012

its nothing like the western part of the state, not much in common with the middle part either.

PamW

(1,825 posts)

8. Sorry to inform you - WRONG AGAIN!!!

Reply to madokie (Reply #6)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 06:21 PM

Apr 2012

Just because you live near the dams doesn't mean your energy only comes from those dams.

You are on a grid; and your energy comes from all the sources in OK, and not just the ones
close to you.

Only 4% of your electricity comes from those dams; same as anyone else in the state.

Your close proximity to the dams means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING when it comes to your power use.

PamW

Nihil

(13,508 posts)

10. Interesting data at that link ...

Reply to NickB79 (Reply #5)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 05:12 AM

Apr 2012

US (2005):
Coal = 50%, Natural Gas = 15%, Petroleum = 6%, Nuclear = 20%, Hydro = 6%, Renewables = 2%

Oklahoma (2005):
Coal = 57%, Natural Gas = 37%, Petroleum = 0%, Nuclear = 0%, Hydro = 4%, Renewables = 1%

So basically, Google is likely to be using even *more* coal and natural gas in Oklahoma than
they do in their other US bases ... thus validating the OP article ...

... but at least there are "no nuclear killie watts" in that particular dark & toxic cloud ...

madokie

(51,076 posts)

11. For starters dude it is neither dark nor toxic here

Reply to Nihil (Reply #10)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 06:27 AM

Apr 2012

where google has their data center the primary power is hydro. I can go to four lakes and a pumped hydro in an hours drive. As a kid hydro was where ALL of our electricity came from, these four lakes as a matter of fact. The pump back as we call it was added in the late '60s

Basically google is using mostly Hydro as I said earlier. You make it what you will that makes you happy, I can't control that in the least, nor would I want to

NickB79

(19,258 posts)

12. Unless Google's buildings are plugged directly into a dam, PamW has a point

Reply to madokie (Reply #11)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 01:00 PM

Apr 2012

There is no filter in the lines that can differentiate between electrons from coal vs. electrons from hydro. Being near a dam means little when you look at how electricity is distributed on the grid. If you're pulling electricity from the OK grid, you're using primarily gas and coal to get that electricity.

Nihil

(13,508 posts)

13. C'mon ... anything that is 57% coal and 37% Natural Gas is pretty dark & toxic ...

Reply to madokie (Reply #11)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 07:34 PM

Apr 2012

No, I don't agree with everything that PamW says any more than I support everything
that Kristopher says. The fact is that if your state is taking 57% coal and 37% natural
gas then the cloud that it produces is both dark AND toxic.

If you swallow the Google greenwash then fine - at least you have found a level at which
you can balance the lies against the truth - but it doesn't mean that what you believe is true.

Reply to this discussion