Google signs 20-year deal to power data centers with wind energy

[AgnesIO]

Umm no they haven't as it's well documented that wind turbines have a very short lifespan, require an awful lot of maintenance, aren't very reliable and they actually cost more to make than they will earn in their lifetime. So while it's good they're using renewable energy sources, they are essentially promoting a ridiculous way of generating electricity.

Google = Multi-million pound company.
People on hxf - nothing like that.

I am sure google know the risks etc lol

[flatface]

what do you mean 'no they haven't' lol, they are have bound to look into wind energy wether it's for profitble reasons or enviromental reasons. they arn't just going to think 'hmm let's buy a 20 year contract for wind energy' and sign the dotted line within 5 minutes lol...

I agree, obviously Google aren't just going to rush into a 20 year contract lol...

Anyway it's nice to see that Google are going green

[GommeInc]

Wind energy costs a helluva lot for what you get. It's environmentally friendly, but not economical. Google have the money to spend on it, while things like the UK government that get attacked for such things, do not really have the money or the money is better spent elsewhere, seeing as it's tax payers money. I think that's where some of you are getting a bit confused.

Econimical = No.
Environmental = Yes, sort of.

[Recursion]

The public needs to stop being so scared of Nuclear power... THAT is the way forward for now.

What we need to find out is just how much pollution is actually made in the manufacturing process... I'm sure they pollute in someway, be it when they produce the paint to when they are producing the metal to go into the blades.

Good on Google!

I think solar power is the way to go, because the efficient panels can work very well even when it's cloudy.

LOL. Solar power and efficient in the same sentence? Solar Panels are nowhere near efficient at their current stage of development.

[xxMATTGxx]

The public needs to stop being so scared of Nuclear power... THAT is the way forward for now.

What we need to find out is just how much pollution is actually made in the manufacturing process... I'm sure they pollute in someway, be it when they produce the paint to when they are producing the metal to go into the blades.



LOL. Solar power and efficient in the same sentence? Solar Panels are nowhere near efficient at their current stage of development.

That's the thing though. You can not say nuclear will be 100% safe and that you don't need to be scared, too many events have happened in the past with Nuclear and that's why people are scared. I agree that Nuclear power is a good way to go for the future, I can understand why people are not too sure about it.

[jackass]

LOL. Solar power and efficient in the same sentence? Solar Panels are nowhere near efficient at their current stage of development.

I didn't once say that solar power was efficient. I said the efficient PANELS (efficient compared to the basic panels) can work well even when it's cloudy.

[HotelUser]

When will people see wind power ISN'T the solution??? Shame on Google! What happens when the wind stops? You have to bring power from a power station... which you have to leave running 24/7...

That has got to be one of the most ridiculous posts I've seen you make since Vista

The idea is to produce a surplus of energy with these turbines than required in which the additional accumulation of energy will be used when there's a lack of wind to power the turbines.

Tom, do you think the engineers who design these turbines or the people at Google are seriously so stupid as to not take wind inconsistency into consideration? They position these things where there's the most and best chance of wind too. I somewhat doubt the mountains and hills they're--usually--placed on disappear overnight, and by the time they've eroded we will either be dead or they would have upgraded technologies.

Yes--shame on Google for trying to be cleaner!

[Recursion]

That has got to be one of the most ridiculous posts I've seen you make since Vista

The idea is to produce a surplus of energy with these turbines than required in which the additional accumulation of energy will be used when there's a lack of wind to power the turbines.

Tom, do you think the engineers who design these turbines or the people at Google are seriously so stupid as to not take wind inconsistency into consideration? They position these things where there's the most and best chance of wind too. I somewhat doubt the mountains and hills they're--usually--placed on disappear overnight, and by the time they've eroded we will either be dead or they would have upgraded technologies.

Yes--shame on Google for trying to be cleaner!

It's a worldwide fact there isn't always wind at the same point...

And actually, I know over here in the UK anyway, there isn't much choice about where your energy comes from, it's all in the national grid anyway. And as someone else said, these Wind turbines actually break very quickly and very easily and we still don't know how much pollution is made in the manufacturing process.

[Jordy]

That has got to be one of the most ridiculous posts I've seen you make since Vista

The idea is to produce a surplus of energy with these turbines than required in which the additional accumulation of energy will be used when there's a lack of wind to power the turbines.

Tom, do you think the engineers who design these turbines or the people at Google are seriously so stupid as to not take wind inconsistency into consideration? They position these things where there's the most and best chance of wind too. I somewhat doubt the mountains and hills they're--usually--placed on disappear overnight, and by the time they've eroded we will either be dead or they would have upgraded technologies.

Yes--shame on Google for trying to be cleaner!

Wind Turbines have a lifespan of 20 years and that's with regular maintenance, for them to last another 5-10 years they need very costly upgrades. They are not economically viable as they cost more to produce than the electricity does so it's a ridiculous renewable energy source to promote. In the long term, even something like Solar Panels are better as they have a much longer lifespan even if they do cost a bit more.

If you ask me, Google have just gone for them for the good publicity and the low-cost in the short term (yet they'd actually save money if they looked into long term solutions).

[GommeInc]

Wind Turbines have a lifespan of 20 years and that's with regular maintenance, for them to last another 5-10 years they need very costly upgrades. They are not economically viable as they cost more to produce than the electricity does so it's a ridiculous renewable energy source to promote. In the long term, even something like Solar Panels are better as they have a much longer lifespan even if they do cost a bit more.

If you ask me, Google have just gone for them for the good publicity and the low-cost in the short term (yet they'd actually save money if they looked into long term solutions).

They have money to waste, so it's fine really They're just trying to look environmental.