Not very, according to Greenpeace, which describes it as among “the dirtiest thing[s] on the internet.” In a report released today, the environmental organization slammed Apple as among cloud computing’s worst eco-offenders (along with Amazon and Microsoft), claiming the company relies too heavily on coal to power its data centers and has fallen short on its efforts to source clean energy. Coal-based energy makes up 55 percent of Apple’s data center power, Greenpeace claims.

“Apple right now is falling behind companies like Google and Facebook, who are taking a leadership role on this issue,” said Greenpeace spokesman Dave Pomerantz. “It’s a shame that a company that built its reputation on thinking differently is now behind the curve.”

But according to Apple, it’s not the one behind the curve here. And, more to the point, it says Greenpeace has gotten its numbers wrong.

According to Apple, its Maiden, North Carolina, data center requires just 20 megawatts when it’s running full bore, and well over half of that energy will come from renewable sources as soon as the 171-acre solar array it is building nearby is finished.

But according to Greenpeace, the Maiden facility requires 100 MW of power running at full capacity, of which renewable energy powers 10 percent and coal 55.1 percent.

Odd, considering Microsoft’s Quincy, Washington, data center, which is exactly the same size as Apple’s, only requires 27 MW, and its Chicago facility, which is 200,000 square feet larger, requires 60 MW.

How is it that a fully operational 700,000 square foot data center demands significantly less power than a not-yet-finished 500,000 square foot one?

And how is it that Apple’s Maiden data center is running on 55.1 percent coal, when publicly available records show that 46 percent of the power Duke Energy supplies it with is coal-fired?

That’s not clear, and Greenpeace initially didn’t have much of an explanation. The organization referred me to the EPA’s 2010 eGrid data for North Carolina on which its report is based. But that draws from data collected in 2007. As for why Microsoft’s fully operational 700,000 square foot data center requires 40 MW less energy to run than Apple’s not-yet-fully operational 500,000 square foot data center, Greenpeace referred my question to Microsoft.

Apple, on the other hand, was more than happy to talk up its power plans.

“Our data center in North Carolina will draw about 20 megawatts at full capacity, and we are on track to supply more than 60 percent of that power on-site from renewable sources, including a solar farm and fuel cell installation which will each be the largest of their kind in the country,” Apple spokesperson Kristen Huguet told AllThingsD. “We believe this industry-leading project will make Maiden the greenest data center ever built, and it will be joined next year by our new facility in Oregon running on 100 percent renewable energy.”

In response to that response, Greenpeace said that Apple’s information just doesn’t jibe with the factors of investment and facility size used in making its estimates.

UPDATE: Good analysis of Greenpeace’s dubious math by Rich Miller over at Data Center Knowledge.

NetworkEffect will be at Facebook headquarters in Palo Alto, Calif. on Thursday morning for a press conference that promises “a behind-the-scenes look at the latest technology powering Facebook.”

Asked for detail, a Facebook spokesperson said the event would cover “Facebook’s hardware and software technology.”

With that as a hint, there are some infrastructure and operations deadlines on the horizon for the company: first, the planned opening of its Oregon data center this spring. And second, the Earth Day deadline Greenpeace has proactively declared for Facebook to stop depending on coal to power its service.

Facebook, in fact, told a local TV news reporter the Oregon data center has been built to be especially green, with recycled and local materials, and a system where one out of every 1.15 watts in the system actually powering computer infrastructure, rather than the typical one out of 1.8.

Will that be tomorrow’s main news topic? We’ll have to see. Tune in to NetworkEffect around 10 a.m. PT for coverage, or watch the press conference on Facebook’s live channel.

Please see the disclosure about Facebook in my ethics statement.

The Pac-Man-style video game is based on a real-life tussle involving endangered Olive Ridley Sea Turtles. India’s Tata Steel has been building a series of ports along the coast of Orissa, in eastern India, along beachfront that also happens to be one of the biggest nesting sites of the endangered turtle. The environmental organization Greenpeace launched the game last month on Pac-Man’s 30th anniversary to protest the project.

Greenpeace oceans campaigner Areeba Hamid says “entertainment-campaigning” has brought hundreds of thousands to the group’s environmental causes.

“Since we have had the same audience for a long time, we do different things online to try to engage new interest,” said Ms. Hamid.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

To keep you abreast of tech news while he’s away, we’re compiling a daily digest of 10 must-read tech stories. Our Tech 10 appears below.

1. Bienvenue, iPhone: France Telecom has begun selling Apple’s cellphone at selected Orange stores in Paris and other cities. The device itself will cost about $1,106 with no plan attached, or 399 euros (about $590) with one of four “Orange for iPhone” plans, Computerworld notes, adding it will cost 100 euros ($148) to unlock the handset.
2. FCC Says ‘Uncle’: A proposal by Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin to tightly regulate the cable TV industry has been “drastically” trimmed, reports the New York Times, which noted that Martin had sought more diverse programming and reduced cable costs.
3. Amazon: 1; Feds: 0. The federal government has lost its bid to compel Amazon to release details about the book-buying habits of thousands of its customers, according to Declan McCullogh on his blog, The Iconoclast. The Justice Department sought the information to prove its case against a former Madison, Wisc., city official accused of evading taxes in selling used books online.
4. Google, Online Snitch? The search colossus has voluntarily given the IP address of an Israeli blogger who used “Google Blogger” to allegedly slander municipal council members running for reelection, the Israeli Web site Globes Online reports, calling the move “unprecedented.”
5. YouTube, Censor? The popular video-sharing site has suspended the account of a well-known Egyptian anti-torture activist who posted videos of alleged brutality by a number of Egyptian policemen, Wael Abbas told Reuters, claiming that about 100 images he had sent were no longer available on YouTube.
6. But It Doesn’t Mind those CondéNet Vids: CondéNet is announcing today that it will distribute videos from its various consumer-interest Web sites via YouTube, The Wall Street Journal reports, adding that the deal is the latest in a series for Condé Nast Publications’ digital division.
7. LinkedIn Link to News Corp.? A “well-placed source” has told VentureBeat that News Corp. (owner of this site) is in talks to buy business-networking site LinkedIn. But LinkedIn CEO Dan Nye told Fortune’s Adam Lashinsky that “It would take a helluva lot” to get him to sell.
8. The Earth, Updated: Google Maps is updating its features, prompting Duncan Riley at TechCrunch to wonder if the new features won’t ultimately send Google Earth down the path of the dodo.
9. Feeling Insecure: Web applications and holes in Windows Office are the top concerns of Internet users, according to the annual security report by SANS, a computer training and security organization, in its Top 20 risk assessment for 2007.
10. How Green Is My Gaming? Greenpeace has released a report slamming Nintendo and Microsoft for making their video-game consoles with toxic chemicals, reports BusinessWeek, noting that the enviro group’s latest ranking of electronics firms this week also highlights questions over the environmental impact of the products and how much consumers care about them.

–posted by Associate Editor John Sullivan

Greenpeace learned that Wednesday, when Apple chief Steve Jobs published an open letter addressing its indictment of Apple’s green practices. “Apple has been criticized by some environmental organizations for not being a leader in removing toxic chemicals from its new products, and for not aggressively or properly recycling its old products,” Jobs wrote. “Upon investigating Apple’s current practices and progress toward these goals, I was surprised to learn that in many cases Apple is ahead of, or will soon be ahead of, most of its competitors in these areas. Whatever other improvements we need to make, it is certainly clear that we have failed to communicate the things that we are doing well.”

Indeed. Especially to Greenpeace, which didn’t even
bother to actually measure toxins in Apple’s products. According to the Statistical Assessment Service, Greenpeace used Apple’s labeling to determine which chemicals are present in its products and then used the precautionary principle for those chemicals’ toxicity to calculate its green score. “In other words,” explains STATS, “if a study has shown that a chemical causes some damage in rodents, the precautionary principle dictates that one must assume the chemical is a risk to humans, no matter what the quantity, or the likelihood of actual exposure, or the mode of action, or the weight of countervailing evidence. If we applied the precautionary principle to vegetables as Greenpeace does to computers, we’d have to ban tomatoes and lettuce, as the naturally occurring caffeic acid is a carcinogen in rodents at high quantities.”

Nice, eh? It get’s better. According to the EPA’s Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool, Apple’s products are among the most environmentally friendly in the PC world. Which is not to say that the EPEAT is the best gauge of green standards, just that there exist data points that don’t support Greenpeace’s accusations against Apple. Anyway … green tech is obviously an important issue, and it’s wonderful to see Apple make a public commitment to environmental action like this–regardless of its inspiration.