Apple Athenry data centre

CrankyHaus wrote: »

It's absolute waffle. I remembering visiting the Facebook Clonee datacentre site for work and it was Irish companies, all the employees I happened to meet were Irish too, mainly blocklayers from outside Dublin. (though obviously that was coincidence, construction employs plenty of non-Irish who come here, as it should if they're the best person for the job and are here legally)

The main contractor was English but all the trades were Irish companies on that site.

Johnny Poor Lemonade wrote: »

Horrible company? :rolleyes: nonsense.

I am absolutely hope beyond hope the gov and Apple win this case. It’s insane this is even happening in the first place. If they lose I would fully hope and expect the money to get back to them in the ways you describe and rightly so.

Apple are a fantastic company and are massively important to Ireland. Some other pain one the hole Eu countries who are jealous of us are the ones forcing this.

Nonsense? It's an opinion but one I can give plenty of examples for if that helps to justify my opinion. First, you could just watch the Panorama documentary that aired a few years ago to see some of the horror in the mines and factories. I think everyone knows FoxConn factory workers were literally jumping off of the roof of the factory the iPhones were being manufactured in.

Apple also have a history of doing a Trump. Reneging on deals or not paying for work completed in the knowledge they have a team of lawyers and can drag out court cases until the other party run out of money. A company in the US for example had a contract for manufacturing screens for the iPhone. It was by far their largest ever contract and to meet it, they needed to build a massive factory, invest in new equipment and hire a sh1t load of people.

They got everything setup and in place and then Apple reneged. Apple claimed they were mislead about the quality of the screens and the other company claimed Apple did a bait and switch. They knowingly let them go all in for this huge project and then tried to back out with a BS excuse.

It took close to 3 years but eventually there was a settlement for an undisclosed amount but at that point the company needed to clear the case to finalize it's bankruptcy to move forward.

Being great for Ireland is also an opinion but the fact is they have been paying an effective tax rate of 2%. They have multiple shell companies hiring one or two people with no physical offices. They claim to employ 6k people directly, if you do a bit of research the average salary of those employees falls between 26k-30k. It's very possible that Apple's Irish employees combined are contributing more in taxes per year than they are.

Warren Buffet (that PoS) has said his secretary pays a higher effective rate of tax on her meager salary than he does and how broken the system is in the US and that's where salary is typically higher than here and taxes are lower.

Apple also have a reputation for treatment of contractors. Those brave enough to speak out.

I stand by labelling them horrible with evidence provided. Apple are a horrible company who make great hardware, are very good at marketing and make sh1t software.

I'm also for keeping a low corporate tax rate but actually getting them to pay the correct rate or at least closer to it after incentives is needed. No point being bootlickers and allowing the middle class to carry the entire tax burden.

Today's Sunday Times reports that Apple's site in Tuam has been advertised for sale in the US as a "ready to go data centre site".

Edit: Athenry

1641 wrote: »

Today's Sunday Times reports that Apple's site in Tuam has been advertised for sale in the US as a "ready to go data centre site".

In Tuam?

Would love if they put a direct provision centre there now:)

Deleted User wrote: »

Forest. 500 acres of forest.

Have you been there?

Have they cleared the pines, which is what satellite imagery shows last time I looked?

Stichy wrote: »

So lets never build anything anywhere outside of Dublin and have 500 acres of a gutted forest to look at, while everyone just moves to Dublin or commutes for hours. If a DC isn't built there it will be somewhere else in Ireland and how do you know how many jobs will be available? have you inside info? have you ever worked in DC's in any shape or form?

What are the advantages of building a data centre out in the middle of nowhere rather than say closer to Galway in an existing industrial park?

cnocbui wrote: »

What are the advantages of building a data centre out in the middle of nowhere rather than say closer to Galway in an existing industrial park?

Where it could then be connected to adjacent housing estates to provide heating. If it was done right they could build social housing and get their heat for free solving a pollution problem and a housing one but no, build it in the sticks with no infrastucture and vent millions of kw's into the atmosphere.

Are there existing power lines to that site of sufficient capacity?

cnocbui wrote:

Are there existing power lines to that site of sufficient capacity?

A 220kV and 110kV run near the site. Given the scale of the planned facility I would imagine that there is a preference for a 220kV connection and substation which would be carried out as a grid reinforcement.

Whether you like it or not DC's are here to stay in Ireland, and with Microsoft building it's own generation capacity in Dublin already, a grid connection won't stop them or anyone else building in Athenry, but it's a golden opportunity for Ireland to make a real improvement to the grid in what we can achieve in terms of a wider move to renewables.

grbear wrote: »

I'd hardly call Athenry the middle of nowhere. Its well connected in terms of infrastructure and the house prices in the area would seem to indicate its a place people want to live.
https://galwaybayfm.ie/galway-bay-fm-news-desk/new-report-shows-athenry-is-countys-most-expensive-town-for-property/

Going back to your question I'm assuming it just comes down to the fact its a lot cheaper to buy a large area of ground in Athenry than it would be in Galway City especially one with plenty of space for possible expansion in the future.

DCs have a list of boxes that need ticking for choosing a location access to power and fibre links being obvious but also they generally like weather that is reasonably stable, safe countries with little terrorism and stable politically. Land prices and access to a workforce also figure in it. There always exceptions to these but by and large it’s what they look for.

irishfire wrote: »

A 220kV and 110kV run near the site. Given the scale of the planned facility I would imagine that there is a preference for a 220kV connection and substation which would be carried out as a grid reinforcement.

Whether you like it or not DC's are here to stay in Ireland, and with Microsoft building it's own generation capacity in Dublin already, a grid connection won't stop them or anyone else building in Athenry, but it's a golden opportunity for Ireland to make a real improvement to the grid in what we can achieve in terms of a wider move to renewables.

How near? I presume we the tax payers would be required to foot the bill for a sub station and lines needed to make a connection.

Renewables are not stable. They have to be backed up by an equivalent capacity of reliable fossil fueled power generation, given that Irish people are terrified of nuclear. Had Apple gone ahead and that data centre reached maximum projected capacity, it would have increased Ireland's total Energy consumption by 8%. That is a lot of wind turbines that have to be put somewhere. It also means increasing the fossil fuel base generation capacity by 8%. All funded by we the tax payers, not Apple. That was one of the big original gripes about the whole project, Apple were making no commitment whatsoever to funding the creation of extra unreliable renewable capacity or reliable capacity. Nor were they proposing to pay a portion of the massive fines Ireland would have to pay the EU for actually increasing carbon emissions rather than reducing them. To say Apple was again envisaging taking the Irish tax payers for a ride is a massive understatement.

Doctors room ghost wrote: »

It was derrydonnell and it’s definitely not the middle of nowhere.its less than 10 minutes from oranmore,less than 5 minutes from Athenry and less than 20 minutes from Galway city.
It is also within 5 minutes from the motorway connecting Galway to Dublin.

All well and good but motorways don't bring power and don't bring fibre networks. I know the area very well and infrastructure wise its the middle of no where. The item at the bottom of any datacentres list would be a motorway and thats the only decent infrastructure close to it.

threeball wrote:

Fines are based on carbon emissions and DC's are huge contributors to increasing carbon emissions. Any infrastructure needed to bring renewables west to east should be invested in but not for the benefit of a DC and certainly not one that does nothing with the energy it produces other than dump it. Any renewables produced on the west coast should be contributing towards reducing our dependence on fossil fuels and reducing emissions, not offsetting the next DC they decide to lob up.

DC's that include their own renewable generation and can access a supply of grid renewables does not. This is all based on the overall offset, yes they may need baseline fossil at certain times, but that will be offset by what they generate, the same as any other large industrial facility that does on site generation, be that wind, solar or CHP.

cnocbui wrote:

How near? I presume we the tax payers would be required to foot the bill for a sub station and lines needed to make a connection.

Both are within 20km of the site at a glance, I don't have an exact measurement to hand. Regarding costs to the tax payer, absolutely not, the same as Intel in Leixlip, Apple in Cork and all other large sites they pay a capital contribution for the grid connection they require. If ESB or IDA negotiate on that price then that is there business, it's up to them to handle these issues for the state.

cnocbui wrote:

Renewables are not stable. They have to be backed up by an equivalent capacity of reliable fossil fueled power generation, given that Irish people are terrified of nuclear. Had Apple gone ahead and that data centre reached maximum projected capacity, it would have increased Ireland's total Energy consumption by 8%. That is a lot of wind turbines that have to be put somewhere. It also means increasing the fossil fuel base generation capacity by 8%. All funded by we the tax payers, not Apple. That was one of the big original gripes about the whole project, Apple were making no commitment whatsoever to funding the creation of extra unreliable renewable capacity or reliable capacity. Nor were they proposing to pay a portion of the massive fines Ireland would have to pay the EU for actually increasing carbon emissions rather than reducing them. To say Apple was again envisaging taking the Irish tax payers for a ride is a massive understatement.

As above, if they are generating on site, or better yet, invest in some form of storage, they will offset any emissions they create. Going by your assertions about fines should we retrospectively apply charges on large businesses/energy users because we have failed to decarbonise the grid at a fast enough rate?

The Microsoft generation I mentioned previously consists of about 16 gas fired units, are we not better placed to try and provide that capacity renewably through either our own grid or through European interconnection rather than have a private company building it to supplement our grid in the capital city?

threeball wrote:

All well and good but motorways don't bring power and don't bring fibre networks. I know the area very well and infrastructure wise its the middle of no where. The item at the bottom of any datacentres list would be a motorway and thats the only decent infrastructure close to it.

Yes, motorways bring fibre. TII have ducted almost if not all motorways and sell duct space. That particular site has access to 3 separate national fibre networks, all of which pass within 15km of the site, 2 actually pass within 5km. That grid connection would also carry a connection to the ESB national ring. They are also close to 2 major aggregation points on the Eir backbone network.

irishfire wrote: »

DC's that include their own renewable generation and can access a supply of grid renewables does not. This is all based on the overall offset, yes they may need baseline fossil at certain times, but that will be offset by what they generate, the same as any other large industrial facility that does on site generation, be that wind, solar or CHP.

Firstly CHP is not renewable, you're burning gas so thats a fossil fuel and a pretty inefficient use of the fuel at that. Secondly this idea the DC's generate their own renewables is absolute bunkum. They buy up the rights to power from a windfarm in Donegal and use the production from this to offset against their usage. The power in donegal is fed on to the same grid as everyone else and gets mixed in with power from a whole manner of sources. The energy from this would have gone on the grid anyway to displace fossil fuels. Its a kin to me claiming that my power comes from ardnacrusha and that I'm running on 100% renewables. Hogwash in other words.

threeball wrote:

Firstly CHP is not renewable, you're burning gas so thats a fossil fuel and a pretty inefficient use of the fuel at that. Secondly this idea the DC's generate their own renewables is absolute bunkum. They buy up the rights to power from a windfarm in Donegal and use the production from this to offset against their usage. The power in donegal is fed on to the same grid as everyone else and gets mixed in with power from a whole manner of sources. The energy from this would have gone on the grid anyway to displace fossil fuels. Its a kin to me claiming that my power comes from ardnacrusha and that I'm running on 100% renewables. Hogwash in other words.

CHP related to on site generation as it the most prevalent at the moment in Ireland, not a renewable source. And what's wrong with a DC generating on site? If they have access to a resource to generate renewably then what's to stop them? If they want to construct that generation asset in a more suitable place and offset against it, more power to them (literally and figuratively). If they want to buy rights to a renewable asset off their own site, same story.

If you're a customer of SSE Airtricity then that's the hogwash you're peddling because they claim to be a 100% green provider by virtue of their wind generation assets, but as you correctly state, customers in the certain parts of the country will seldom use a single joule of wind energy due to how electricity flows and is consumed throughout the grid.

Now it's equally valid that electricity is generated and consumed in the exact same moment, so yes, if a DC possesses enough renewable generation on the Irish grid that their usage never exceeds what they are generating, they can (quite correctly) claim to be renewably powered and help our targets by selling the surplus.

Gadgetman496 wrote: »

I'm delighted Apple are going ahead with the DC in Athenry.

The sites for sale.
While the paddywhackers were stabbing each other in the back and delaying proceedings, apple got a pain in the boll1x and moved on.
Good old paddy Irishman.
The site will remain the same it ever was.a done nothing swamp.no progress for paddy.

Doctors room ghost wrote: »

The sites for sale.
While the paddywhackers were stabbing each other in the back and delaying proceedings, apple got a pain in the boll1x and moved on.
Good old paddy Irishman.
The site will remain the same it ever was.a done nothing swamp.no progress for paddy.

If you think DC's sited like this are progress then you need to educate yourself.

threeball wrote:

They can generate CHP on site but they are burning gas to do so. The volume of gas is recorded and goes against our carbon emissions. Gas has probably the worst profile for NOX emissions. Believing this has anything to do with being "renewable" or offsetting emissions is pure fantasy. As is believing that surplus power from windfarms on the other side of the country somehow offsets all the additional power a DC uses in the first place. No windfarm is coming even close to producing what a DC of this size requires.

Okey, you have some issue with me mentioning CHP so I'll clear it up for you. I made the point that CHP is the most prevalent on-site generated used in Ireland and therefore the greatest source of offset from grid usage in industry at the moment. I was not suggesting it was renewable in any way shape or form, but it is looking promising as a system that can later be ported to biogas, which is.

If you want to check, I'm willing to bet that half our power today is being generated from gas, so we rely heavily on it, both for grid and on site generation. It's going nowhere for the near future.

Going back to renewables and DCs in Ireland, 240MW is the figure that was shouted for the Athenry data centre at full capacity, I think 30MW when opened first. Ireland had 2,900MW installed in 2017. Using a capacity factor of 35% from 2015, we get about 1000MW. Yes it's not ideal, but we knew what we were getting into with wind. It's the reason we need to start doing tidal sooner rather than later in Ireland. We need to store or get more reliable, constant renewables. And windfarms can supply clean electricity to any part of the country as demand changes, no fantasy, just some very simple laws of engineering and physics. It's the reason we have a grid, and the reason we build windfarms where there is wind to extract the most from the investment, and use said grid to get it to where it's consumed.

It appears however, that certain sections of our society don't want us to have wind turbines, or don't want us to expand our electrical grid (or want us to expand using more environmentally damaging methods), but also want us to decarbonise and move away from fossil fuels, stop foreign investment unless they build playgrounds and pay our fines that we incurred ourselves, etc etc. It can't suit us every way, and you're not making any substantially valid argument for why Apple (or the new landowners) shouldn't be building there.