It appears as though Apple doesn't consider nuclear energy "clean". They don't mention it in writing anywhere, and from my locale in Chicago, the "Grid Forecast" available in the Home app is very stingy with its determination of "cleaner" energy, despite IL running on at least 58% nuclear energy (as of 2020).
Is this yet-another Apple scheme to avoid taxes or raise stock prices? Many of these "clean energy projects" are incentivized by the governments through tax benefits, additional investment, or giving land basically for free (and land is investment these days).<p>> This past week Apple announced its first totally carbon-neutral product, its new Apple watch<p>I'd be happy if Apple announced an acid-neutral project (not counting other carcinogenic materials used to produce every single component in that device). Plants (even animals and, to some extent, people) can neutralize carbon compounds, but those acids can't.<p>And let me not start with all the necessary mining and production pollution for batteries and other components no one talks about.
To start, Tim Cook should pledge user-replaceable batteries in iPhones, iPads, MacBooks. People are replacing the entire gadget just because battery capacity went down contributing to electronic waste. Without addressing this elephant in the room his "clean energy future" is a cheap talk.