Apple Athenry data centre

ED E

cnocbui wrote: »

The plan called for a possible eventual expansion to 8 halls, so as those articles state, if it reached that maximum configuration it would be the single largest electricity consumer in the state.

Only if you limit it single site installations. It was fingered around 210MW annualised. There are already customers in that ballpark if not higher.

The difference with Athenry is the awkward location.

Balf

ED E wrote: »

Only if you limit it single site installations. It was fingered around 210MW annualised. There are already customers in that ballpark if not higher.

The difference with Athenry is the awkward location.

Indeed, if it was located in Galway or Cork Cities, the logic might have been different.

I see that in Denmark, they only seem to be proceeding with their planned development in a regional city.

https://9to5mac.com/2019/06/11/apple-data-center-cancelled-denmark/

In a surprise announcement, Apple has cancelled plans to open a large data center in Aabenraa, Denmark. The news was posted on the local town’s website. Apple is looking to sell off the land and leave the site completely.

The Aabenraa site was set to be Apple’s second data center in Denmark, first announced in July 2017. The company is also working on a facility in the city of Viborg.

ED E

ED E wrote: »

The difference with Athenry is the awkward location.

Awkward in what way? It has many things going for it as a DC.

Greaney

irishfire wrote: »

Why shouldn't it go ahead? Because they aren't building it in Eyre Square and heating the city of Galway off it? If they were to do district heating would you be happy to have it within a distance of your home that it could technically and commercially be piped into your area?
.

For me, the short answer is yes!! I would rather it in an IDA business park, right beside a town (and where I live) and get my heating from it, you betcha!! I'm not keen on Multimillion dollar multinationals, being able to throw a dart at a map of Ireland, buy a publicly owned forest, change the planning on it and build a haype of warehouses in the middle of nowhere, with no way to get to it safely but by car!!! All with the blessing of a bunch of gouche politicians lurching from one election to another with neither policy or a 'plan b' career....

grbear

Surely building something like a data centre, especially one as large as envisioned by Apple originally, on the outskirts of Galway is a waste of land. Even as someone who was in favour of the development getting the go ahead I have no problem admitting that it was going to employ a relatively low number of people compared to the size of the facility. Stuff like that Eastgate project near McDonaghs is supposedly going to employ 3000+ in a ten acre site. That seems like the sort of thing that makes sense to have on the edge of a city and leave facilities that need huge footprints but don't employ massive numbers further out.

The Viborg data centre is roughly the same distance from the City Centre as the Claregalway Business Park is from Galway City Centre. It's not like it's in the city.

JJJackal

The Apple data centre will be built - if there is demand for it - unfortunately probably not in Ireland

The data centre would have created jobs and possibly heating. We can debate the number of jobs. Realistically no one can tell exactly. And no one can tell what downstream jobs would be created.

There would have been jobs in building and running the centre and associated industries.

The clear negative is the energy usage. However, this data centre will be built somewhere outside Ireland. The energy needed to power it will be generated. The environmental damage or lack of environmental damage will take place - I don't know.

If built in Ireland, we could have worked with apple to try to create a green facility and as much green power as possible. In light of the variability of wind, all homes etc in Ireland will rely on fossil fuels to generate energy at times. The data centre would be no different. This could potentially change in the future.

For those who reference environmental impact, what alternative do you have? Assuming the data centre will be built elsewhere now

JJJackal

JJJackal wrote: »

For those who reference environmental impact, what alternative do you have?

The food innovator hub about to be built in the Athenry Teagasc alone will contribute more in terms of jobs, long-term sustainability, taxes etc. with a lot less impact

That what you were looking for? Your post had inaccuracies and vagueness so I'm not 100% sure what you are actually after

Whereisgalway

Shouldn't this be in the Galway County forum?

Gadgetman496

Whereisgalway wrote: »

Shouldn't this be in the Galway County forum?

It shouldn't be anywhere!

It's over folks, let it go...

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

The food innovator hub about to be built in the Athenry Teagasc alone will contribute more in terms of jobs, long-term sustainability, taxes etc. with a lot less impact

That what you were looking for? Your post had inaccuracies and vagueness so I'm not 100% sure what you are actually after

We need data centres though, if it's not built here it will be built somewhere else in the Ireland or the world. We might as well be benefitting from it rather than pushing it off somewhere else.

Its an anti-progress mentality by a very small few people who can't see the bigger picture. This could have lead to a tech hub and attracted in many more companies and many more jobs thats what happens. Imagine the medial devices boom in galway was stopped in its tracks, Galway would have massively suffered.

Johnny Poor Lemonade

Johnny Poor Lemonade wrote: »

We need data centres though, if it's not built here it will be built somewhere else in the Ireland or the world. We might as well be benefitting from it rather than pushing it off somewhere else.

The planned center would have ended up costing the country in additional fines for not meeting emissions targets. We are already so far off target it's going to cost us millions a year. Given the proposed center would have consumed the equivalent of 5+ counties of electricity it would have exacerbated the situation

This could have lead to a tech hub and attracted in many more companies and many more jobs thats what happens.

A data centre is a glorified warehouse, nothing more. Added to this, the location of Apples one was to be in the middle a forest, miles away from the nearest village on the west of Ireland with the main access road narrowing to a single car width in places, with no public transport ever possible to the site and no way to ever walk/cycle there. i.e. It's the poster child for how to avoid creating a hub

Athenry can and already has done better.

JJJackal

Deleted User wrote: »

Added to this, the location of Apples one was to be in the middle a forest, miles away from the nearest village on the west of Ireland with the main access road narrowing to a single car width in places, with no public transport ever possible to the site and no way to ever walk/cycle there. i.e. It's the poster child for how to avoid creating a hub

Athenry can and already has done better.

Very close to athenry. Very near the countries only two intersecting motorways. 60 minutes from Shannon. Maybe 90 from Knock.

Probably about 20 minutes to Galway. Athenry is serviced by a railway - although I agree as it currently stands the apple site would not really be accessible by this method.

At present there is no need for public transport to this site. There could have been if it was needed in the future.

Land acquisition costs are probably relatively cheap - doesnt need to be built in a town or city. Land appears relatively flat. Room for expansion

You say its a poster child for how to avoid building a hub - I ask you where is there a better location?

cnocbui

It shouldn't be built in a rural are, it should be built in an urban area zoned for industrial buildings, like a business park. One-off industrial buildings in rural areas should be so obviously a bad idea I'm surprised this has to be pointed out. Siting in a an urban area would also more readily allow for waste heat to be used to heat homes, as is being done in Denmark.

JJJackal

JJJackal wrote: »

You say its a poster child for how to avoid building a hub - I ask you where is there a better location?

Denmark

cnocbui

cnocbui wrote: »

It shouldn't be built in a rural are, it should be built in an urban area zoned for industrial buildings, like a business park. One-off industrial buildings in rural areas should be so obviously a bad idea I'm surprised this has to be pointed out. Siting in a an urban area would also more readily allow for waste heat to be used to heat homes, as is being done in Denmark.

It's an absolutely ideal site. Building in a city or in a business park on the outskirts just increases traffic and makes it difficult for people to commute to work along with making it difficult for all the people already working there due to increased traffic.

The Athenry site was perfect, accessible to vast swathes of the country with two motorways nearby, perfect for people to commute to who live rurally or in towns as there would be no traffic issues, people could commute easily and quickly from far away so could live where they want not where they work. This is the type of site that needs to be used for future business parks, well outside the nearest city thus well away from the traffic and making it easily accessible for people in a large geographical area.

ben.schlomo

Johnny Poor Lemonade wrote: »

It's an absolutely ideal site. Building in a city or in a business park on the outskirts just increases traffic and makes it difficult for people to commute to work along with making it difficult for all the people already working there due to increased traffic.

The Athenry site was perfect, accessible to vast swathes of the country with two motorways nearby, perfect for people to commute to who live rurally or in towns as there would be no traffic issues, people could commute easily and quickly from far away so could live where they want not where they work. This is the type of site that needs to be used for future business parks, well outside the nearest city thus well away from the traffic and making it easily accessible for people in a large geographical area.

I think we could accommodate the six extra cars, who knows maybe some of the 6 staff might use PT or cycle.

ezstreet5

Johnny Poor Lemonade wrote: »

It's an absolutely ideal site.

With Moneypoint operating in limp-home mode, it may no longer be ideal for a data centre.

Johnny Poor Lemonade wrote: »

This is the type of site that needs to be used for future business parks, well outside the nearest city thus well away from the traffic and making it easily accessible for people in a large geographical area.

IDA has two vacant sites for this purpose already - 92ha in Athenry and 27ha in Oranmore. Both are closer to the M6 than Derrydonnell by miles.

JJJackal

cnocbui wrote: »

It shouldn't be built in a rural are, it should be built in an urban area zoned for industrial buildings, like a business park. One-off industrial buildings in rural areas should be so obviously a bad idea I'm surprised this has to be pointed out. Siting in a an urban area would also more readily allow for waste heat to be used to heat homes, as is being done in Denmark.

Building in a city is both expensive, unnecessary, takes up a lot of land which could be used for houses, offices... One of industrial building is a bad idea if you have a lot of visitors, customers, workers... I dont know if one off data centre building would fall into that category.

Re waste heat - I presume you just pipe the water to Athenry or other town or city.

cnocbui

Johnny Poor Lemonade wrote: »

It's an absolutely ideal site. Building in a city or in a business park on the outskirts just increases traffic and makes it difficult for people to commute to work along with making it difficult for all the people already working there due to increased traffic.

The Athenry site was perfect, accessible to vast swathes of the country with two motorways nearby, perfect for people to commute to who live rurally or in towns as there would be no traffic issues, people could commute easily and quickly from far away so could live where they want not where they work. This is the type of site that needs to be used for future business parks, well outside the nearest city thus well away from the traffic and making it easily accessible for people in a large geographical area.

JJJackal wrote: »

Building in a city is both expensive, unnecessary, takes up a lot of land which could be used for houses, offices... One of industrial building is a bad idea if you have a lot of visitors, customers, workers... I dont know if one off data centre building would fall into that category.

Re waste heat - I presume you just pipe the water to Athenry or other town or city.

I disagree with both of you. The site was ideal for Apple, but not for Ireland. Since neither of you can see why commercial enterprises shouldn't be allowed to pick anywhere they want in the country to set up and operate, there's nothing more to be said or argued over. You might like to ponder that there is a well established practice called zoning and perhaps wonder why that exists.

JJJackal

cnocbui wrote: »

I disagree with both of you. The site was ideal for Apple, but not for Ireland. Since neither of you can see why commercial enterprises shouldn't be allowed to pick anywhere they want in the country to set up and operate, there's nothing more to be said or argued over. You might like to ponder that there is a well established practice called zoning and perhaps wonder why that exists.

I get that concept - hence you apply for planning, rezoning...

cnocbui

cnocbui wrote: »

I disagree with both of you. The site was ideal for Apple, but not for Ireland. Since neither of you can see why commercial enterprises shouldn't be allowed to pick anywhere they want in the country to set up and operate, there's nothing more to be said or argued over. You might like to ponder that there is a well established practice called zoning and perhaps wonder why that exists.

Which they applied for and were granted permission. A lot of people appear to forget the fact that planning has been granted.

I currently own an acre of farm land in a few months it will be a fully planning compliant site for building a house. That’s how planning and zoning works.

what_traffic

Johnny Poor Lemonade wrote: »

I currently own an acre of farm land in a few months it will be a fully planning compliant site for building a house. That’s how planning and zoning works.

Hmmm thats not correct. Applying for Planning and zoning are not the same. Equating building a house on a family homestead v's a large Industrial Commercial enterprise is really stretching it as an example.

Was the proposed Athenry site actually zoned as "Industrial Land"? Zoning occurs during every Development Plan Cycle(7 yr ), always easier to get planning if the zoning for it is already stated. So would be far easier to get planning for a Data Centre in the IDA industrial Park that is zoned for such activity.

machiavellianme

ezstreet5 wrote: »

With Moneypoint operating in limp-home mode, it may no longer be ideal for a data centre.



IDA has two vacant sites for this purpose already - 92ha in Athenry and 27ha in Oranmore. Both are closer to the M6 than Derrydonnell by miles.

But neither are directly under 2 different 220kV circuits and hidden from view by woodland.
Proximity to roads is largely irrelevant in data centre site selection.

ezstreet5

machiavellianme wrote: »

But neither are directly under 2 different 220kV circuits and hidden from view by woodland.
Proximity to roads is largely irrelevant in data centre site selection.

IDA's Athnery site is 810m from the Cashla-Tynagh 220kV line, and 1500m from the Cashla-Prospect 220kV line, so not a huge distances. Being hidden by a woodland is great for a datacentre, but that doesn't mean you just sell your public woodland because a datacentre wants to build there. I agree with you that traffic will be low, commensurate with the low employment and near zero local inputs and outputs.

what_traffic

machiavellianme wrote: »

Proximity to roads is largely irrelevant in data centre site selection.

Not irrelevant at all - during the construction phase consideration is given for the type of roads available for access when it comes to planning the build. You will read whole chapters on it in a planning application, vehicle movements, type of vehicles, time of day etc

Greaney

https://www.rte.ie/radio/radioplayer/html5/?fbclid=IwAR0ICXboRuZsqgoFeUh7kVrh3pKfW1SY3BRrhdR8j2qgBjr8AjJakJAsa5M#/radio1/11139763

Apple Data Centre starts 2:09:44 into the program

the whole year inn

Greaney wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/radio/radioplayer/html5/?fbclid=IwAR0ICXboRuZsqgoFeUh7kVrh3pKfW1SY3BRrhdR8j2qgBjr8AjJakJAsa5M#/radio1/11139763

Apple Data Centre starts 2:09:44 into the program

Any cheat notes of what they said?

Greaney

the whole year inn wrote: »

Any cheat notes of what they said?

Sure...

1) Allan Daly, the Athenry appellant, was right to appeal for very good reasons.
2) Although it may have been good for Athenry, it wouldn't be good for the nation because
a) The electricity use was going to be huge
b) We're paying fines for not meeting our emission targets due to our increased energy use, almost all of which is due to data centres.
c) Data Centres will make up 30% of all our electricity use in the next few years (about eight).
d) The Government, with taxpayers money are paying most of the bills, and not the billion-dollar multi nationals of whom we are asking no mitigation.
e) The North South interconnector was built for data centres, but that's been dropped from the publicity material.
f) We as a nation don't seem to impose planning conditions like district heating centres.

So in conclusion these tech companies are piggybacking on public infrastructure. Finally, as a result of the Apple objections the government seems to have changed laws limiting public participation in the planning process that may be to the detriment of the environment.

The interview is only 10 mins long really but packed with info

Robbo

the whole year inn wrote: »

Any cheat notes of what they said?

I'm not going to get into the environmental arguments (which were well made out, except for a general conflation of Eirgrid with "the taxpayer" and the misnaming of the Nation) and stick to the legal errors in the piece.

The RTE reporter states baldly that the Courts found against him on a "narrow point of law" which is demonstrably false. It's poor journalism that the reporter obviously didn't read the publicly available and easily found judgments as 13 grounds for judicial review were pleaded in the High Court and dealt with quite comprehensively by McDermott J. None of these grounds were found to be valid reasons to quash the decision of ABP.

If there's any issue in relation to narrowing of issues, it's on the part of the Applicants/Appellants (i.e. Fitzpatrick & Daly) who sought to narrow the issues down to 4 discrete points in their Supreme Court appeal.

Furthermore, it was falsely stated that the government have introduced legislative changes to limit public participation in the planning process. These proposals never made it past the pre-legislative stage before yesterday's dissolution of the Dáil.

As we've seen on this thread, there's a huge and persistent appetite to misrepresent what went on in the Courts in relation to this for whatever reason.

cL0h

Johnny Poor Lemonade wrote: »

people could commute easily and quickly from far away so could live where they want not where they work.

Johnny Poor Lemonade wrote: »

well away from the traffic and making it easily accessible for people in a large geographical area.

They need to start teaching classes on "induced demand" in primary school because it is just not getting through to some people.