Apple to Build Two of the World's Largest Wind Turbines in Net-Zero Climate Impact Pledge

Apple has today announced that it will construct two of the world's largest onshore wind turbines near Esbjerg in Denmark, in an expansion of its investment in renewable energy.

apple eu renewable energy expansion wind farm 09012020

Via a press release, Apple explained that the new 200-meter-tall turbines will produce 62 gigawatt hours of energy every year, enough to power almost 20,000 homes. The area will also function as a test site for more powerful offshore wind turbines that may be constructed in the future.

The power produced at Esbjerg will support the Apple data center in Viborg, with all surplus energy going to the Danish grid. The Viborg data center helps to power the App Store, Apple Music, iMessage, Siri, and other services in Europe. Apple has already constructed one of Scandinavia's largest solar arrays to power the data center.

"Combatting climate change demands urgent action and global partnership — and the Viborg data center is powerful proof that we can rise to this generational challenge," said Apple's vice president of Environment, Policy and Social Initiatives, Lisa Jackson. "Investments in clean energy deliver breakthrough innovations that bring clean energy and good jobs to businesses and local communities. This is an area where we have to lead — for the sake of our planet and future generations."

Last month, Apple announced its intention to become completely carbon neutral by 2030. The new investment in onshore wind turbines is expected to help the company achieve its net-zero climate impact goal within the next decade, and will aid Apple's effort to transition all of its Europe-based suppliers to renewable power.

European Apple suppliers Henkel and tesa SE, DSM Engineering Materials, STMicroelectronics, and Solvay are reportedly working towards clean energy solutions for their Apple fulfillment. German Apple supplier Varta has this week committed to running all Apple production with 100 percent renewable energy.

Note: Due to the political or social nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Political News forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

Popular Stories

iphone 17 models

No iPhone 18 Launch This Year, Reports Suggest

Thursday January 1, 2026 8:43 am PST by
Apple is not expected to release a standard iPhone 18 model this year, according to a growing number of reports that suggest the company is planning a significant change to its long-standing annual iPhone launch cycle. Despite the immense success of the iPhone 17 in 2025, the iPhone 18 is not expected to arrive until the spring of 2027, leaving the iPhone 17 in the lineup as the latest...
duolingo ad live activity

Duolingo Used iPhone's Dynamic Island to Display Ads, Violating Apple Design Guidelines

Friday January 2, 2026 1:36 pm PST by
Language learning app Duolingo has apparently been using the iPhone's Live Activity feature to display ads on the Lock Screen and the Dynamic Island, which violates Apple's design guidelines. According to multiple reports on Reddit, the Duolingo app has been displaying an ad for a "Super offer," which is Duolingo's paid subscription option. Apple's guidelines for Live Activity state that...
Clicks Communicator Feature

'Clicks Communicator' Unveiled — Will You Carry This With Your iPhone?

Friday January 2, 2026 6:35 am PST by
The company behind the BlackBerry-like Clicks Keyboard accessory for the iPhone today unveiled a new Android 16 smartphone called the Clicks Communicator. The purpose-built device is designed to be used as a second phone alongside your iPhone, with the intended focus being communication over content consumption. It runs a custom Android launcher that offers a curated selection of messaging...
Low Cost MacBook Feature A18 Pro

Low-Price 12.9-Inch MacBook With A18 Pro Chip Reportedly Launching Early This Year

Friday January 2, 2026 9:08 am PST by
Apple plans to introduce a 12.9-inch MacBook in spring 2026, according to TrendForce. In a press release this week, the Taiwanese research firm said this MacBook will be aimed at the entry-level to mid-range market, with "competitive pricing." TrendForce did not share any further details about this MacBook, but the information that it shared lines up with several rumors about a more...
Apple Fitness Plus hero

Apple Announces New Fitness+ Workout Programs, Strava Challenge, and More

Friday January 2, 2026 6:43 am PST by
Apple today announced a number of updates to Apple Fitness+ and activity with the Apple Watch. The key announcements include: New Year limited-edition award: Users can win the award by closing all three Activity Rings for seven days in a row in January. "Quit Quitting" Strava challenge: Available in Strava throughout January, users who log 12 workouts anytime in the month will win an ...
Low Cost A18 Pro MacBook Feature Pink

Apple's 2026 Low-Cost A18 Pro MacBook: What We Know So Far

Friday January 2, 2026 4:33 pm PST by
Apple is planning to release a low-cost MacBook in 2026, which will apparently compete with more affordable Chromebooks and Windows PCs. Apple's most affordable Mac right now is the $999 MacBook Air, and the upcoming low-cost MacBook is expected to be cheaper. Here's what we know about the low-cost MacBook so far. Size Rumors suggest the low-cost MacBook will have a display that's around 13 ...
Mac Pro Feature Blue

What's Happening With the Mac Pro?

Wednesday December 31, 2025 9:59 am PST by
Apple hasn't updated the Mac Pro since 2023, and according to recent rumors, there's no update coming in the near future. In fact, Apple might be finished with the Mac Pro. Bloomberg recently said that the Mac Pro is "on the back burner" and has been "largely written off" by Apple. Apple apparently views the more compact Mac Studio as the ideal high-end pro-level desktop, and it has almost...

Top Rated Comments

PinkyMacGodess Avatar
70 months ago
Great idea!!! We've got windmill farms around here. It's flat. REALLY flat, and areas here get ripping winds. People used to say that they should put windmills in here, and now that they have, people complain about them. *shrug*.

The wind is free. It's always here, well almost always. In order to win the future, we will have to rely on things to power it that don't come from the ground. At some point, there won't be any gas, or oil. Humans need to start now to plan for that eventuality, otherwise it will decimate the global economy, and destroy many nations.

What I wish is that more companies would get into battery research. I hear that is what is holding up widespread adoption of wind and solar power. Those home solar kits can cost $60,000 or more. It's hard to get a payback in a reasonable time with an outlay like that. Yikes.


I had no idea a single wind turbine could generate enough power for 10,000 homes.

Sure they cause cancer but we need more, lots more.
Windmills don't cause cancer. Ignorance causes cancer...o_O
Score: 21 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Pangalactic Avatar
70 months ago
Nuclear is way better. The main problem with solar and wind is that they are really inefficient, as we don't have any good energy-storing technology at the moment. Too much wind or sun gets totally wasted, whilst too little wind or sun requires using other technologies to provide the electricity in times of deficit.
Score: 11 Votes (Like | Disagree)
cupcakes2000 Avatar
70 months ago

The basic raw unpopular truth is that Global Climate Change, just like we've seen with the CCP Virus, is and has always been based upon models. And the models have never been correct. You can go back and find fear mongering about climate change for countless decades. Indeed, in the 70s, the basic fear was an ice age was coming. Search for "letter to nixon from brown university about ice age" (without the quotes)

Compare today's temperatures with the 1930s (high) or the 1970s (lows) and you will find that we are rather comfortably between those two "extremes" which, historically over 2000+ year time frames are not the historic highs or lows (i.e. Medieval Warm Period)

You can also look at "catastrophic" weather events and find that we are having fewer and smaller not more and bigger as the fear mongers claim.

The other problems with wind turbines is in 20 years, the huge blades are disposed of in landfills and not recycled. The materials they are made of will almost never deteriorate back into the environment. Wind turbines tend to kill birds, especially raptors. These are relatively rare birds that are being needlessly slaughtered just to make SJWs feel good about themselves. And, you still need to add gas power generation to fill the peak needs when there is no sun or wind. i.e. we still have no real viable large scape storage except for water pump back stations which are few. This ultimately raises prices of energy. The currently occurring rolling blackouts. CA assumed they could buy power from other states but when the other states need the power, there is none to buy.

If you really want to dig into climate change, all the data is at NOAAs FTP site. Go find it and analyze it yourself; otherwise you are just assuming "the experts" are unbiased which we've seen (e.g. HCQ retracted "scientific" studies) is not true.
Except, of course, pumping all of of the gasses which we do pump into the atmosphere, many of which are known and proven greenhouse gasses - is a known quantity.

It’s undeniable as you can look out o your window and watch it in action.

To suggest it’s not having an effect on the planet is absolutely absurd as it can’t NOT be, by any form of logical or critical thinking, whether you’re an expert or just an ordinary person.

Many of these gasses are known to heat up the planet, and many of them occur naturally - however, we are multiplying the natural amount of these gasses historically being released into the atmosphere by many thousands of times. Logic can only dictate this will speed up the natural warming and cooling cycle of the planet by many thousands of times.

If one can’t see that, regardless of your beliefs around scaremongering on such subjects, then it’s true that only fools keep their eyes closed.

Edit* Of course, I’m talking to a brick wall as the OP has already given their game away in the first sentence by referring to the coronavirus as the ccp virus. Avoiding experts whilst relying on YouTube channels for ‘real news’, is laughable at best - although this is becoming worryingly standard behaviour.
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Schranke Avatar
70 months ago

Nuclear is way better. The main problem with solar and wind is that they are really inefficient, as we don't have any good energy-storing technology at the moment. Too much wind or sun gets totally wasted, whilst too little wind or sun requires using other technologies to provide the electricity in times of deficit.
Actually a lot of the wind energy created at night in Denmark when the demand is low, is used in Norway to refill hydroelectric reservoir by pumping the water back up. We might not be able to store the energy perfectly, but storing it as potential energy still saves some of it.
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Lukian52 Avatar
70 months ago

Nuclear is better, if there was a way to deal with the waste. Well, and the eventual oops that causes a meltdown, and the eventual decommisioning. Unlikely as that might be, the effects of a meltdown far outweigh the convenience of nuclear power. A meltdown will ruin your day, even if it's 100 miles away. There was a working nuclear power plant south west of here. On an inspection, they found that batts of insulation had fallen into the cooling water. There were literally batts of insulation flowing through the cooling system. Not ideal by any stretch. They finally closed it down. Crazy...
Waste is no problem, it is fuel for Fast Reactors. And meltdowns are not a danger for the public, as Fukushima paradoxically demonstrated (zero radiation deaths, zero cancers, unnecessary evacuation - the information is available at UNSCEAR and WHO).
Score: 7 Votes (Like | Disagree)
PinkyMacGodess Avatar
70 months ago

Not sure if serious?
The people that are pushing that lie get money from the petroleum companies. The idea is that the sound of the blades causes cancer. If that were true, where are the cancer victims of Nickleback and Phish? Not to mention all the other sad excuses for 'music' that have been produced in the past.
Score: 7 Votes (Like | Disagree)