Apple pulls out of data center in Athenry due to fcuked up planning and gob****es

CB19Kevo

I did have big concerns about this, Mainly was this the best location for a project of this scale.
Would any one of the urban areas not be a better option.
Easier to attract and retain staff,better infrastructure, quicker emergency response in the event of a incident and importantly it would have less of a visual impact in some already built industrial estate.

Unfortunate for the area however at least on the jobs front.

Cantona's Collars

CB19Kevo wrote: »

I did have big concerns about this, Mainly was this the best location for a project of this scale.
Would any one of the urban areas not be a better option.
Easier to attract and retain staff,better infrastructure, quicker emergency response in the event of a incident and importantly it would have less of a visual impact in some already built industrial estate.

Unfortunate for the area however at least on the jobs front.

It's in the middle of boggy forest. Even at that it's only about 15 minutes drive from Galway. Afaik Apple said they'd replant trees all around the site so basically the building would be almost invisible.
I assume Apple still own the land?

VinLieger

Boggles wrote: »

You are not really looking at this objectively.

If we can't offer energy security because one very small facet is hoovering up 75% of our future energy demands, progress from all other industry could be hampered and if that happens will cost jobs.

Well then we get careful with our planning laws and put checks on future data centres and energy consumption but was this one data centre going to push us over the edge? No and that's what this discussion is all about.

Your argument amounts to we aren't good at future planning so we shouldn't even bother.

Doctors room ghost

Just passed the site where apple was going to be built.guess what’s happening there today.

NOTHING.just like every other day.congrats to the paddywhackers.pat on the back for ye

DellyBelly

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Working on it.
Meanwhile if you just mail it to:

Cnut
Dublin

It'll land right on his desk.

Ha Ha...

Boggles

VinLieger wrote: »

Well then we get careful with our planning laws and put checks on future data centres and energy consumption but was this one data centre going to push us over the edge? No and that's what this discussion is all about.

Well no, the energy consumption debate was very much part of the discussion for the past 3 years, so is more than relevant.

It's the far bigger problem in fact.

VinLieger wrote: »

Your argument amounts to we aren't good at future planning so we shouldn't even bother.

That isn't an argument, that's an actual fact. Eirgrids plan to combat the growth is basically they hope someone else does something in terms of the renewable side.

My argument is I don't want to be paying more on my all ready high energy bills because Apple want to park their iTunes catalog in a warehouse on this island.

Are you happy enough paying 5-10% extra or whatever to have 50 odd buildings sucking up a fifth of the grid?

That's before we get into further taxation and penalties for not meeting our targets in 2 years time.

wexie

Boggles wrote: »

That isn't an argument, that's an actual fact. Eirgrids plan to combat the growth is basically they hope someone else does something in terms of the renewable side.

And do you not think that's somewhat problematic?

Regardless of future usage forecasts?

VinLieger

Boggles wrote: »

That isn't an argument, that's an actual fact.

So again we just go back to the caves.... cus whats the point in even trying ehh?

Boggles

wexie wrote: »

And do you not think that's somewhat problematic?

Regardless of future usage forecasts?

VinLieger wrote: »

So again we just go back to the caves.... cus whats the point in even trying ehh?

The problem will be infinitely worse if we allow one tiny facet of industry to suck up 3 times more than the rest of industry and housing combined over the next 12 years.

I've all ready stated, but take a minute and ask yourselves what sort of damage could that actually do to everything else that is not a data centre going forward.

VinLieger

Boggles wrote: »

The problem will be infinitely worse if we allow one tiny facet of industry to suck up 3 times more than the rest of industry and housing combined over the next 12 years.

I've all ready stated, but take a minute and ask yourselves what sort of damage could that actually do to everything else that is not a data centre going forward.

And you are ignoring that you are advocating for us simply stopping a specific type of foreign investment because we couldn't be bothered trying to create the infrastructure to deal with it. Great message to be sending out to the world.....

You arent even suggesting or open to us trying to do something about the problem you just are basically saying "yeah lets not bother"

twinytwo

I'm sure everyone is aware of the massive power input that data centres require... And that even with the large number of improvements this input doubles every four years.

Given the amount of companies that want to build data centres here, who do you think is going to have to food the bill for all the extra power stations just to meet this demand?

The negatives of the data centres far outweigh the positives

wexie

Boggles wrote: »

The problem will be infinitely worse if we allow one tiny facet of industry to suck up 3 times more than the rest of industry and housing combined over the next 12 years.

I've all ready stated, but take a minute and ask yourselves what sort of damage could that actually do to everything else that is not a data centre going forward.

Of course it wouldn't end well. That wasn't my question though was it?

My question was that this is a situation Eirgrid is forecasting and doing nothing about.

You don't see that as a problem?

I'm not arguing we should allow an unlimited expansion of data centers (although I don't see a problem with this one) but if there is a market for them then I also don't think that not allowing them to be built because Eirgrid can't/won't cope with the demands of the potential future market place is really the right approach.

You're essentially saying that rather than solving a potential problem caused by expansion/progress we should just stop that expansion/progress.

(btw, purely out of curiosity brought on by your earlier comment about Eirgrid waiting for some other player to make a move in the renewable market....would there be anything stopping them from making inroads themselves? other than lack of funding being the obvious one)

Annd9

Evd-Burner wrote: »

Seriously? Please show your number calculations cause that is far too low a calculation.

Security alone for the first phase would have been 30-40. You have to remember that these places are staffed 24/7/365 that a lot of the time you may see only 15 to 20 people but you have to multiply that by 4.

We are talking about long term jobs not each phase .

You mentioned security , ever heard of analytics? This technology has made physical security guards a thing of the past . I'm sure they would have employed a few people to be on site but not many .

Regarding the running of the centre , on Tuesday I was in a pretty big one that has 2 storeys and 12 halls . Each hall is dedicated to a different company , those company's do not employ somebody to maintain their own hall .This is done by the owner/operator of the centre or by someone within the company who would look after their own hall's in multiple locations .

Want know how many people work in this vast building with 100's if not 1000's of servers/firewalls etc ,not to mention electrical/mechanical maintenance? 8 people will be there at any given time , factor in shift rotation and that centre only employs about 20 people ....

Bigus

What sort of commercial RATES is Galway county going to lose out on for the next 50 years ? €1Million ,€5million or am I way off .

But if it was the same sort of bill as aughinish alumina you're talking 6.6 million annually.

These county council commercial rates may have had more of a positive impact on Galway county budget than any other factor .

Boggles

VinLieger wrote: »

And you are ignoring that you are advocating for us simply stopping a specific type of foreign investment because we couldn't be bothered trying to create the infrastructure to deal with it. Great message to be sending out to the world.....

You arent even suggesting or open to us trying to do something about the problem you just are basically saying "yeah lets not bother"

wexie wrote: »

Of course it wouldn't end well. That wasn't my question though was it?

My question was that this is a situation Eirgrid is forecasting and doing nothing about.

You don't see that as a problem?

I'm not arguing we should allow an unlimited expansion of data centers (although I don't see a problem with this one) but if there is a market for them then I also don't think that not allowing them to be built because Eirgrid can't/won't cope with the demands of the potential future market place is really the right approach.

You're essentially saying that rather than solving a potential problem caused by expansion/progress we should just stop that expansion/progress.

(btw, purely out of curiosity brought on by your earlier comment about Eirgrid waiting for some other player to make a move in the renewable market....would there be anything stopping them from making inroads themselves? other than lack of funding being the obvious one)

Well no, if Eirgrid and associates can accommodate the expansion and meet our renewable targets I'm all in. Brilliant, Bravo. Taxation and our energy bills don't go up. I'm happy.

Have ye any documented proof that this is even remotely possible? Even an outline of a plan from some official would do me?

wexie

Boggles wrote: »

Well no, if Eirgrid and associates can accommodate the expansion and meet our renewable targets I'm all in. Brilliant, Bravo.

Have ye any documented proof that this is even remotely possible?

No, but just as I don't have any proof it's possible you don't have any that it isn't.

And you know why that is don't you?

So basically your whole argument is ' we don't know if it can be done so it's best we don't try or even find out'.....

That's going to get us very far indeed.

VinLieger

twinytwo wrote: »

And that even with the large number of improvements this input doubles every four years.

Citation for this? cant find anything confirming it

twinytwo wrote: »

The negatives of the data centres far outweigh the positives

Not really if we account adequately for the negatives which nobody seems to think we are capable of doing

Boggles

wexie wrote: »

No, but just as I don't have any proof it's possible you don't have any that it isn't.

We haven't a fookking hope of meeting our renewable targets. :pac:

wexie wrote: »

So basically your whole argument is ' we don't know if it can be done so it's best we don't try or even find out'.....

No, my argument is based on what Eirgrid are saying is we may have an energy security problem in the near future, this is in the majority been fueled by data centres.

I'm not saying they shouldn't try expand, I'm saying I don't have the confidence they will be able to, and if they can't another solution to the problem has to be a ban (not forever) on data centres.

That's pretty reasonable, no?

jmayo

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Working on it.
Meanwhile if you just mail it to:

Cnut
Dublin

It'll land right on his desk.

No that would find it's way to the CEO of the HSE.

wexie

Boggles wrote: »

We haven't a fookking hope of meeting our renewable targets. :pac:

but that's not because it can't be done, it's because it isn't being done!!!

Boggles wrote: »

No, my argument is based on what Eirgrid are saying is we may have an energy security problem in the near future, this is in the majority been fueled by data centres.

and they are doing what, exactly, to avert this impending disaster?

Boggles wrote: »

I'm not saying they shouldn't try expand, I'm saying I don't have the confidence they will be able to, and if they can't another solution to the problem has to be a ban (not forever) on data centres.

That's pretty reasonable, no?

That is absolutely reasonable and I would partly agree with you. And I wouldn't even blame you in not having the confidence that 'they' can do it.

But again it's not a case of it can't be done....

So we're both saying pretty much the same thing : that Eirgrid, or the lack of investment/expansion is the problem here.

I just see the addition of data centers as a potential part of the solution ie. to give them a good boot up the hole and make something happen.

Of course there shouldn't be rampant building of data centers in a way that's going to cause problems in the foreseeable future.

But that is not taking away the fact there's a market for data centers because our ****ty climate is uniquely suited to the way data centers work. And a market should be encouraged to grow not stifled by a lack of forward vision and planning. And generally that seems to be done by private enterprise either providing the stimulus or taking the lead.

The attitude seems to be less 'if we build it they will come' and more 'eh....if they come we'll have a think about building something, eventually, once it becomes an emergency'

Blazer

Annd9 wrote: »

We are talking about long term jobs not each phase .

You mentioned security , ever heard of analytics? This technology has made physical security guards a thing of the past . I'm sure they would have employed a few people to be on site but not many .

Regarding the running of the centre , on Tuesday I was in a pretty big one that has 2 storeys and 12 halls . Each hall is dedicated to a different company , those company's do not employ somebody to maintain their own hall .This is done by the owner/operator of the centre or by someone within the company who would look after their own hall's in multiple locations .

Want know how many people work in this vast building with 100's if not 1000's of servers/firewalls etc ,not to mention electrical/mechanical maintenance? 8 people will be there at any given time , factor in shift rotation and that centre only employs about 20 people ....

Any DC has onsite security for security reasons and also for monitoring the rooms themselves.
There’s absolutely no way Apple would leave a a physically unguarded DC that is responsible for iCloud, iTunes , Apple Pay etc.
Also a lot of the network/ firewall team wouldn’t need to be onsite at the same time and would be on call as well.
It would have at least a minimum of 4 of each dedicated to it.
Then you would have both storage, server engineering and the ESX guys so again you’re looking at another 10+ people at a bare minimum.
Add in facilities, maintenance and cleaning crews and it’s more again.
Just because you only see a few people onsite doesn’t mean there’s not more.

professore

Boom_Bap wrote: »

Someone should plant a load of apple trees in the fields of Athenry.

No wonder Michael fúcked off to Australia.

Harry Palmr

**** me, imagine being known as "the people who robbed us of jobs" in a place the size of Athenry

ted1

phunkadelic wrote: »

Data centres don't provide many jobs. The only meaningful number would be during construction, so temporary.

This would have provided about 50 high tech jobs , 20 security guard jobs , several jobs for cleaners and landscapers.
Those staff would spend money in local shops and eatery’s which would create more jobs.

As it uses so much electricity it’s create jobs in power plants and transmission and distribution.


It would attract other companies to the area and create more jobs

Boggles

wexie wrote: »

But that is not taking away the fact there's a market for data centers because our ****ty climate is uniquely suited to the way data centers work. And a market should be encouraged to grow not stifled by a lack of forward vision and planning.

Of course it should but not at the potential determent to every other industry or future potential industry.

And not to the financial determent to you and me who usually end up footing the bill when things go títs up.

fergiesfolly

The site in Denmark that is up and running. Is that not a comparable site to Athenry?
What are the staffing levels there?
Would that not give a more accurate figure of the jobs lost to Athenry?
Beats this he said, she said.

cnocbui

DellyBelly wrote: »

Would it be easy enough to get his address?

Here is a starting point:

Daly, a senior engineer at Sierra Research,

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

Of course it should but not at the potential determent to every other industry or future potential industry.

And not to the financial determent to you and me who usually end up footing the bill when things go títs up.

But what about when these other industries come up against the dysfunctional f**ked up planning process we have now. Needs streamlining badly. 6-9 months tops for the process to play itself out. Serial objectors exploit the flaws in the process rather than use the process itself in order to get their way IMO.

Annd9

Blazer wrote: »

Any DC has onsite security for security reasons and also for monitoring the rooms themselves.
There’s absolutely no way Apple would leave a a physically unguarded DC that is responsible for iCloud, iTunes , Apple Pay etc.
Also a lot of the network/ firewall team wouldn’t need to be onsite at the same time and would be on call as well.
It would have at least a minimum of 4 of each dedicated to it.
Then you would have both storage, server engineering and the ESX guys so again you’re looking at another 10+ people at a bare minimum.
Add in facilities, maintenance and cleaning crews and it’s more again.
Just because you only see a few people onsite doesn’t mean there’s not more.

Never did I state there would be no security on site , just a couple of people .

I totally agree with your other points as they back up mine . 150 people would not be directly employed by Apple IN Athenry, it would be closer to 60 .With remote access and the use of contractors for major works local people would have hardly got a look in .

I used the other( smaller ) centre as an example of how little
manpower it actually takes to run the place day to day .

salmocab

Annd9 wrote: »

Never did I state there would be no security on site , just a couple of people .

I totally agree with your other points as they back up mine . 150 people would not be directly employed by Apple IN Athenry, it would be closer to 60 .With remote access and the use of contractors for major works local people would have hardly got a look in .

I used the other( smaller ) centre as an example of how little
manpower it actually takes to run the place day to day .

There would be way more than a couple of security guards at any time it’s s campas not a single building in an industrial estate. There would be a gatehouse a security office mobile patrols of the building along with possibly perimeter and campas patrols. Without seeing the plans I’d be surprised if there was less than 10. They also generally have escorts for contractors.