Love ’em or hate ’em, there is no denying that Apple is a true technological Goliath, the likes of which the world has never seen before. According to Forbes, Apple is currently the 15th largest company on earth, and comfortably the most valuable, with an estimated worth of $483 billion. It comes as no surprise, then, that their approach to energy efficiency and sustainability comes under more scrutiny than any other organization — when even the slightest change to your environmental policy makes headlines, it is even more crucial to get things right.
With this in mind, last week’s announcement by Apple made for encouraging reading for the company’s many shareholders. CEO Tim Cook revealed that Apple will invest almost $850 million over the next 25 years in solar energy, hooking up their colossal new Cupertino headquarters to a vast, 1,300-acre solar farm in Monterey County. The energy produced there will also cover much of Apple’s other power needs across the state, including a huge data center in Newark and a grand total of 52 Apple stores throughout California.
Via Climate Central
The news was greeted by notable positivity from Greenpeace, home to the world’s most (in)famous environmental activists: they released a statement waxing lyrical about the company’s eco strategy, even going as far as to lionize Apple’s CEO as a role model for his approach to green initiatives:
“Apple still has work to do to reduce its environmental footprint, but other Fortune 500 CEOs would be well served to make a study of Tim Cook, whose actions show that he intends to take Apple full-speed ahead toward renewable energy with the urgency that our climate crisis demands.”
This compliment marks a quite extraordinary turn-around for Apple in the eyes of Greenpeace. Only four years ago, the company was named the “least green” technology company by the same organization, which lambasted their use of energy-hungry data centers across the world. Gary Cook, Greenpeace’s IT policy analyst and the author of the report, emphasized the changing priorities of the public: “Consumers want to know that when they upload a video or change their Facebook status that they are not contributing to global warming or future Fukushimas.”
Rendering of Apple’s new headquarters. Image via Concrete Aspirations
While this hyperbole smacks of scaremongering in the extreme (“future Fukushimas”? Really?), it indicates that although Apple has not always been at the pinnacle of eco-friendly design, it has been gaining ground on this front at a rapid pace in recent years. Between 2010 and 2013, the company achieved a 169% increase in the use of renewable energy at Apple corporate facilities worldwide — their offices now run on 94% renewable power.
The approach to environmental impact in the design of their glittering, donut-shaped headquarters appears to form the next logical step along this strategic path. As well as buying into one of the most epic solar farms in the United States, Apple also tasked British superstar architect Sir Norman Foster with concocting a supremely energy-efficient system for the campus itself.
Façade section detail. Via Maximac
This culminated in a building envelope packed with high-tech features designed to reduce energy consumption. Air can flow freely between the interior and exterior of the sweeping circular structure, allegedly providing natural ventilation for 75% of the year. An enormous onsite solar array will cover the roof of the campus, which — combined with the energy provided by the Monterey facility — means that the campus will be powered by 100% renewable energy sources.
Beyond the building, the vast courtyard and surrounding parkland will be planted with “drought-tolerant” plants to minimize water use. Transport has been considered too: Apple is expanding their program of biofuel buses for commuters, and over 1,000 shared bicycles will be made available at the campus — not to mention 300 charging stations for electric vehicles.
Upon completion, the campus as a whole is designed to consume “net zero energy,” and should comfortably achieve the highest possible LEED rating for commercial buildings. Not only does this all makes for excellent PR, but it also makes sound financial sense, according to the MIT Technology Review: The cost of solar power has dropped so much in recent years that it is now “cheap enough to compete with grid energy in some situations.”
Opinions on the Foster’s design will no doubt remain polarized, with many questions already having been raised — how long will it take employees to walk from one side of the building to the other given its astronomically large layout? Will workers feel a little like they are operating within a giant, secretive spacecraft, completely disconnected from the outside world? Is going nearly $2 billion over budget ever acceptable?
Regardless of your view, though, it seems fair to say that Apple’s environmental credentials stack up incredibly well at present — architecturally and otherwise — and as long as it serves their business in the long term, it seems likely they will continue.
Right, if you’ll excuse me I have to make a phone call… on my Nexus 5.
Yours environmentally,
The Angry Architect