nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

Kermit.de.frog

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2018/0510/961460-apple-athenry/

There you have it folks.

The result of a couple of locals and a fcuking eejit in Co Wicklow.

Not surprised. Total pisstake.

I'm sorry for the people of Athenry. You could of done with it. Good things don't come your way due to lunatics and a ****ed up planning process.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

VinLieger

Boggles wrote: »

Sorry, what?

Someone from the trump economics outlook who doesn't understand jobs in are a net gain and if McDonalds left we would not have those jobs so would be worse off not better.....same with apple and other multi nationals

VinLieger

Ronaldinho wrote: »

The infrastructure..

You said they would pay for the expansion of the grid.

Do you have a source confirming same, and if so, how much were they set to pay?

Well their bills arent gonna magically pay themselves.......

Shurimgreat

Some of the planning objections may have been valid (not Allan Daly's) but its the delay dealing with them where the real issue is. Appeal after appeal after appeal. Local court, High Court, Supreme Court, then European Court.
Can't see that process changing any time soon so Apple rightly pulled the plug.

Ronaldinho

Karen Late Rubber-stamp wrote: »

Who cares if they will pay or not. The infrastructure needs to be improved regardless unless you propose we should turn down all investment from now on and not bother creating jobs purely because you don't want to use electricity.

It comes down to a cost benefit analysis. I'm no expert on this stuff but simple cop on suggests that the scale of energy usage would demand a significant spend on the grid and far beyond just the cost of getting the site hooked up. If we are being suitably compensated for that then grand - but I'd like to see some information on this before I cast judgement on the whole thing.

jmayo

Fiery mutant wrote: »

“Construction of the first phase of eight promised to generate 300 temporary jobs, with up to 150 permanent staff required to run it”.

You can run a massive data centre on a lot less bodies than that.
Yes you need facilities, electrians etc, but most of the enterprise management, the administrators, etc could be sitting in Seattle, Cupertino, Palo Alto.

Yes you need some tech guys to unbox new hardware, stick then in racks, plug them in, etc but they are just doing the basic grunt work.

I think Meep's take on it is more correct.
If it reached half that 150 it would be doing well.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The locals welcomed it with open arms. They had protests FOR it.

I can just imagine some of their protests.

OSI wrote: »

Not to mention Apple is committed to making all of it's facilities run on 100% renewable energy so they would have followed up the development with investment in renewable energy resources in Ireland.

Would this be a forked tongue statement like their CEO made that they did not avail of any Caribbean island tax loopholes, whilst at the same time availing of an European island tax loophole and just before they moved to another European island to avail of it's tax loopholes.
:rolleyes:

I wouldn't trust a word Apple says or for that matter most multinationals.

meep wrote: »

One of the more interetsing points I learned from this while reading up on it some time back was that in Denmark, one of the planning provisions was that the excess heat from the centre was to be recycled for domestic heating. As I recall, there's a housing estate close by that gets it's heating generated from the data centre.

In Ireland, planning officials didn't take such an enlightened bview and were happy for all that excess heat to be vented to atmosphere. (ie wasted).

Scandinavia is a whole different world.
How many data centres in the US and Britain would use heat transfer systems?
So we are not the only ones late to that party.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

But do you live in Athenry?

Maybe people like you should leave it to the local people to decide what they think is best for their town.

Disgusting they have been deprived of this investment due to morons.

After seeing the mess the locals made in their GAA club and the subsequent banning of the entire juvenile part of the club due to pigheadness, downright nasty behaviour and ignoring organisational instructions, I wouldn't trust some of them to run a p**s up in James Gate.

BTW as someone who once worked in a datacenter when they were just beginning in this country, I think they are good idea, but I don't know why they ever decided on Athenry.

runawaybishop

Ronaldinho wrote: »

It comes down to a cost benefit analysis. I'm no expert on this stuff but simple cop on suggests that the scale of energy usage would demand a significant spend on the grid and far beyond just the cost of getting the site hooked up. If we are being suitably compensated for that then grand - but I'd like to see some information on this before I cast judgement on the whole thing.

We already have data centers in the country, non have had planning refused due to power requirements. MS even built their own generators cos we were too slow. This site had planning approved several times - they pulled out due to the serious delays involved in the appeals.

The power requirements were not the issue here.

KildareP

Ronaldinho wrote: »

The infrastructure..

You said they would pay for the expansion of the grid.

Do you have a source confirming same, and if so, how much were they set to pay?

First off, the ESB do not connect you for free - ask any farmer!!!

It's up to you to put in place your own plant and, subject to it being to ESB Networks standards, they'll then charge you for physically connecting to you to the supply network. If it's not to standard, it's on you to make it so.

You are then expected to contribute to any significant costs that the ESB Networks incur if your supply (Maximum Import Capacity) is large. For example, ask ESB Networks how much it would cost to get a three-phase supply into your house. There is no fixed cost, ESB will do a site survey and then issue you with a quote for works. Nothing further happens until you've agreed to pay those costs.

Most datacentres would have their own internal onsite substation - again, Apple would have had to fund that.

This is before a single watt flows.

Second, you pay for ongoing usage.

As alluded to a datacentre build like this is gradual, it's not like there's a big launch day and someone flicks a big switch and ZAP, 300MW suddenly gets drained out of the grid.

In Apple's case, they've paid the initial connection, now their ongoing usage is all billable as well. As their usage ramps up, so too will their bill. And when the time comes they need to step up their power draw to the next band - refer back to my first point... This is, in essence, funding ESB Networks for background expansion.

CruelCoin

Estrella Salty Leak wrote: »

But let's say it's just 30 full time jobs locally. That in itself is a good thing.

There were 30 top-of-the-line unemployed network engineers in Athenry? :rolleyes:

The local area would have benefited from a security job or two, but beyond that, the current populace would experience a net positive of precisely diddly squat.

Bringing jobs (and workers) to an area is not the same as employing the current residents. It does nothing for the unemployment rate in the area.

Billy86

CruelCoin wrote: »

There were 30 top-of-the-line unemployed network engineers in Athenry? :rolleyes:

The local area would have benefited from a security job or two, but beyond that, the current populace would experience a net positive of precisely diddly squat.

Then why do they appear to have been strongly in favour of it?

VinLieger

CruelCoin wrote: »

but beyond that, the current populace would experience a net positive of precisely diddly squat.

Those 30 people wouldn't be living and spending their money in the local area?

Ronaldinho

runawaybishop wrote: »

We already have data centers in the country, non have had planning refused due to power requirements. MS even built their own generators cos we were too slow. This site had planning approved several times - they pulled out due to the serious delays involved in the appeals.

The power requirements were not the issue here.

Hmm - so is there upward pressure on commercial electricity rates to fund the necessary infrastructure investment? Or is there a levy like those charged by local authorities on housing developments for example?

Another point made in the IT website is that we are fined by the EU from 2020 if we're using less than 40% renewables. Did Apple, separately have plans for new renewable energy production to offset the demand by the proposed data centre? Or who pays for the fine if their (massive) energy usage contributes to us falling below the 40% target?

Boggles

runawaybishop wrote: »

MS even built their own generators cos we were too slow.

You have just highlighted the problem and maybe a possible solution. AFAIK they haven't actually built them yet and if they do it will be for backup only.

It's not that anyone is too slow, it's that the construction of these centres are too rapid, far quicker than building a sub station to cope, far quicker than building the equivalent 20,000 houses.

Eirgrid then have to spend 10s of millions of Euro on upgrades just for 1 cluster of data centres equivalent to 100's of 1000's of houses .

Do you think Microsoft contribute to that build, they would contribute to the connection fee.

They pay there ESB bill, but so does everyone else.

DellyBelly

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Allan Daly is a cnut and I can only encourage people to bully him out of the country, because Ireland doesn't need up his own hole arseholes like him.
I would definitely suggest that people mail packets of dogsh*t to him.
All the trolls are having a massive wankfest I see.

Would it be easy enough to get his address?

Boggles

CruelCoin wrote: »

There were 30 top-of-the-line unemployed network engineers in Athenry? :rolleyes:

The local area would have benefited from a security job or two, but beyond that, the current populace would experience a net positive of precisely diddly squat.

Bringing jobs (and workers) to an area is not the same as employing the current residents. It does nothing for the unemployment rate in the area.

I'm also pretty sure Mick the builder couldn't knock one of these out in 12 months.

Somehow me thinks that the expertise for the bulk of it would be imported.

VinLieger

Ronaldinho wrote: »

Another point made in the IT website is that we are fined by the EU from 2020 if we're using less than 40% renewables. Did Apple, separately have plans for new renewable energy production to offset the demand by the proposed data centre? Or who pays for the fine if their (massive) energy usage contributes to us falling below the 40% target?

Your entire argument is based on wild illogical hypotheticals.

First as has been pointed out we have several other data centres and our grid is not under stress. If anything the tens of thousands new houses we require for our population will be what puts it under stress if we don't properly develop it

Second, why would apple building a data centre make us choose to develop new power sources that had us fall below the eu goal of 40% renewables? And why would they then pay the fine if we did?

yrreg0850

DellyBelly wrote: »

Would it be easy enough to get his address?

If I was a struggling business person in Athenry, I know how I would treat these two local objectors.

yrreg0850

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Some of the planning objections may have been valid (not Allan Daly's) but its the delay dealing with them where the real issue is. Appeal after appeal after appeal. Local court, High Court, Supreme Court, then European Court.
Can't see that process changing any time soon so Apple rightly pulled the plug.

A question needs to be asked --Who is behind the funding for all these appeals.
Court appeals do not come cheap -are these two objectors self funding??

Boggles

VinLieger wrote: »

Your entire argument is based on wild illogical hypotheticals.

First as has been pointed out we have several other data centres and our grid is not under stress. If anything the tens of thousands new houses we require for our population will be what puts it under stress if we don't properly develop it

75% of our increased energy needs will come from data centres in the next 12 years.

That's according to Eirgrid.

What that means is all other population increase, housing, industry, farming, etc, etc, etc will only account for 25%.

That's the Grid providers forecast. Not a wild illogical hypothetical.

runawaybishop

CruelCoin wrote: »

There were 30 top-of-the-line unemployed network engineers in Athenry? :rolleyes:

The local area would have benefited from a security job or two, but beyond that, the current populace would experience a net positive of precisely diddly squat.

Bringing jobs (and workers) to an area is not the same as employing the current residents. It does nothing for the unemployment rate in the area.

I know of several people working in tech in Dublin who would bite your hand off for the opportunity to relocate back home in the west. Even if they are not local they will be spending locally.

dr.fuzzenstein

DellyBelly wrote: »

Would it be easy enough to get his address?

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

Cnut
Dublin

It'll land right on his desk.

runawaybishop

Ronaldinho wrote: »

Hmm - so is there upward pressure on commercial electricity rates to fund the necessary infrastructure investment? Or is there a levy like those charged by local authorities on housing developments for example?

Another point made in the IT website is that we are fined by the EU from 2020 if we're using less than 40% renewables. Did Apple, separately have plans for new renewable energy production to offset the demand by the proposed data centre? Or who pays for the fine if their (massive) energy usage contributes to us falling below the 40% target?

That's a problem for the likes of airtricity etc - we cant block development because our electricity suppliers are falling behind quotas and that is not what happened in this case anyway.

VinLieger

Boggles wrote: »

75% of our increased energy needs will come from data centres in the next 12 years.

That's according to Eirgrid.

What that means is all other population increase, housing, industry, farming, etc, etc, etc will only account for 25%.

That's the Grid providers forecast. Not a wild illogical hypothetical.

Fair enough but while quoting that scary 75% figure you left out the key fact that data centres will still only account for 15% of energy needs according to the same report.

We have the climate and lack of environmental dangers that make Ireland very attractive for datacentres so why not take advantage of that and plan ahead?

TheAnalyst_

DellyBelly wrote: »

Would it be easy enough to get his address?

Yeah I've seen it shared around on a few private faceboook groups. I'd honestly consider leaving the country for a few months if I was in his position.

knipex

runawaybishop wrote: »

We already have data centers in the country, non have had planning refused due to power requirements. MS even built their own generators cos we were too slow. This site had planning approved several times - they pulled out due to the serious delays involved in the appeals.

The power requirements were not the issue here.

100% agree.

This case and the whole data center yes or no should be separated..

Boggles

VinLieger wrote: »

Fair enough but while quoting that scary 75% figure you left out the key fact that data centres will still only account for 15% of energy needs according to the same report.

Only?

15% is a fooking absolute mammoth figure.

50 odd large buildings employing the minimum and doing nothing really of benefit sucking up to 20% of the grid.

VinLieger wrote: »

We have the climate and lack of environmental dangers that make Ireland very attractive for datacentres so why not take advantage of that and plan ahead?

Because essentially we are terrible at planning ahead, our 5 year national broadband plan that was supposed to be finished in 2016 is still out for tender.

They are about to put 4g on the moon FFS.

We have all the essentials for Data Centres but we don't have the most crucial one, energy security.

Very simply are you prepared to pay extra on your energy bills just because Apple can have a hard drive farm?

I'm not.

Shurimgreat

Its going to be very hard to relieve pressure on the likes of Galway and Dublin population or accommodation wise if industry in rural areas is opposed on environmental or other grounds. The more people you try to squeeze into the cities the more miserable living conditions become there especially with the inability of the majority to afford to buy or rent. I'm convinced in light of decisions like this and recent scandals this country is, was and will always be a basketcase.

VinLieger

Grand so, all progress is halted, lets go back to the caves! Sure then we wont need any energy at all.....

Buford T. Justice XIX

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Allan Daly is a cnut and I can only encourage people to bully him out of the country, because Ireland doesn't need up his own hole arseholes like him.
I would definitely suggest that people mail packets of dogsh*t to him.
All the trolls are having a massive wankfest I see.

Mod note: dr.fuzzenstein, don't post in this thread again.

Buford T. Justice

Cantona's Collars

yrreg0850 wrote: »

A question needs to be asked --Who is behind the funding for all these appeals.
Court appeals do not come cheap -are these two objectors self funding??

Exactly,only this week we had a judge say that to go to court you "needed to be a pauper or a millionaire".

Boggles

VinLieger wrote: »

Grand so, all progress is halted, lets go back to the caves! Sure then we wont need any energy at all.....

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.