So, this building will not consume a single watt of energy, or have a single person working in it that exhales CO2... hmmm more marketing bullshit!
Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer made a rare press-conference appearance after the Cupertino city council approved Apple Campus 2, extolling the green credentials of his company's 2.8m sq foot, $5bn "spaceship." "We're going to build the best office building ever built in the world," Oppenheimer modestly told the lightly attended …
I did read the bit about electricity sources ... 30% from 'green suppliers'. This is where an electricity supplier that has multiple sources, some green and mostly non-green, pretends that you are only supplied by the green electricity when in reality it is all fed into and out of a single grid. There is no way to transmit just the 'green' energy to a particular consumer.
Even with a notional supply of the green stuff to apple, just means the other customers, get a greater proportion of their supply notionally from non-green. This sort of smoke and mirrors does not really constitute real green energy any more than carbon offsetting does.
However thumbs up to apple for at least generating much of its own power by renewable means, even if the carbon free claims are pr bullshit.
That passing gas emits Methane, which is a more powerful "greenhouse gas", and includes Carbon as well. Combined with the emissions (noted above) of alive breathing humans, there is going to be a bunch of "hot air" emitted.
One can presume that this is "balanced" by some greenery that will be planted around "Spaceship Steve".
So much "flustering". Must be Al Gore on the board of directors (in his do as I say, not as I do mode).
Concrete? Unlike Asia and Africa, most modern construction here is steel, 'though the floors and foundation are certainly concrete.
And I'm sure the production of the steel produces lots of greenhouse gas. Not to mention the glass and sheetrock and everything else that goes into it.
And I'm sure the production of the steel produces lots of greenhouse gas. Not to mention the glass and sheetrock and everything else that goes into it."
Not being in the construction industry, I might be talking out of my arse, but isn't the point of all the greenery they'll be planting supposed to be additional CO2 soak to offset the the CO2 emitted during construction/running of the building?
I'm not saying the numbers add up or haven't been massaged but I'm sure people in the know will be looking on with interest at how the claims stack up.
The innovation that will come from the team, particularly in the collaborative environment that we're going to build, will be immeasurable.
Yeah all you disbelievers, look what the two Steves managed to do with nothing more than a garage! Wait did Peter Oppenheimer just admit that Apple needs a $5 billion dollar spaceship to be innovative again? Maybe I just read his statement wrong.
How were those panels manufactured, transported, installed, cleaned and maintained?
How will they be disposed of when they wear out or break?
What poisonous and polluting chemicals are used and discharged during these lifetime stages?
If we're trading CO2 emissions for emissions of poisons and heavy metals, is that a sensible thing to do?
Where does the energy come from when it's dark or during bad weather, which is when the most heating and lighting is required?
Swindon is not known for its bright sunny days!
If you're saying "storage", what is the environmental cost of that storage?
You'd think, in these modern times, that people who are capable of reaching that position would make a small effort to understand the basic operating principles of the real world. I was dumbfounded when I read that and actually spent time trying to figure out what he might have been trying to say.
You are not supposed to figure out anything from Apple - you have just to believe and consume. Repeat after me - 'Believe and consume ...'
(Disclaimer - this is just a rant after buying an Ipad - beatifully made piece of kit , but you can't actually DO anything on it. Believe and consume.)
Will all employees be required to wear butt plugs?
Plus as we all know getting green energy from outside sources is as easy as buying it, it's not a political lie.
Lastly onsite fuel cells?
But let's not forget Steve Jobs was the best man the earth has ever created and probably will ever create. Oppenheimer being a close second.
It's not serious. Clearly just a PR message destined to greenster hipsters not averse to buying an iPhone.
Not having a complete accounting of the CO_2 (and other emissions) of all the materials and labor going into the SS Apple over its whole lifetime including decomissioning? You don't have it? Can't be done? Stop talking in superlatives then. And relying on "green sources" in California? FAIL.
Seriously, the best that will ever be built? Is that Captain America's lair?
I agree, this was the part that made me laugh:
" the most environmentally friendly building of its size we think has ever been built and may ever be built"
This ought to be filed away with "no one will ever need more than 640K" and "why would anyone need a computer in their house" in the list of futuregazing clangers.
I think what he must be trying to say is that the operation of the building (as opposed to its contents) won't add to atmospheric co2. Even if what he actually said implies that no life form that enters the building can ever leave.
It would of course be GOOD for the environment if the building emitted megatons of carbon atoms, presumably converted from human emissions of CO2.
With the space analogy I suppose they will make water out of piss and energy out of shit too. Just kidding, but it is actually a bit funny how easy it is to make jokes about Apple. Remembering his awful yacht design (who bought it, or is it still for sale) you get this feeling that Jobs, indeed, had rather exaggerated beliefs in him self. Also I think nobody within Apple. to day, would have the guts to rethink and alter that holy "design".
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019