3 ms·
If you look at Bitcoin as a store of value like gold, the energy consumption is actually not that high. From a wired post But in his paper, Vranken counters t
by asar 9y ago
If you look at Bitcoin as a store of value like gold, the energy consumption is actually not that high.
From a wired post
But in his paper, Vranken counters that in the 100MW to 500MW range, bitcoin mining requires between 0.8KWh to 4.4KWh per year, but the energy required for mining and recycling gold – which backs US currency – is 138KWh a year, while printing paper notes and minting coins is 11KWh.
http://www.wired.co.uk/article/how-much-energy-does-bitcoin-mining-really-use http://www.wired.co.uk/article/how-much-energy-does-bitcoin-...
- Daycrawler 9y agoHasn't gold stopped backing US currency since like almost one century?
- pjc50 9y agoCan we have the actual paper, because those numbers without context are obviously nonsense? "0.8KWh to 4.4KWh" isn't the total consumption of anything, I'm guessing it's supposed to be per bitcoin mined or is it per dollar value? > "gold – which backs US currency" Not true.
- asar 9y agoThis seems to be the paper referenced http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877343517300015?via%3Dihub http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877343517... >Not true. Massive gold reserves are still held by all central banks, so I'd say it is true. Gold and the military back the US currency.
- pjc50 9y agoThis is not how "backing" is normally understood, though; the currency is not exchangeable for gold at a fixed rate. People like to say the military "backs" the currency too, but I've never understood what this means in practice. The stability of the US dollar has caused it to be used by all sorts of countries as a reference, entirely voluntarily.
- asar 9y agoReceiving tax payments is essential to countries in our current global monetary system. USD are spent by citizens but also by the government itself, both depend on system stability. Now assume that one day a large enough number of people/corporations decides not to pay their USD taxes anymore. The FED would issue new bonds to ensure liquidity of the government. Banks would have to buy these bonds from the government and how would these banks be convinced that this is a one time event and tax payers will return to normal behavior and their large USD reserves don't turn worthless? The military. Trust in the military force is also what gives foreign and domestic investors trust in the dollar.
- pjc50 9y agoSo you're saying the US would become a military dictatorship, and this is supposed to be reassuring? It's a weird kind of fantasy scenario about a tax strike.
- asar 9y agoI agree that it's far fetched and an extreme example, but still interesting to think it through. As it does shed some light on the different actors and their potential motivations.
- pjc50 9y ago> interesting to think it through I see a pre-determined conclusion there rather than very much kind of thought. Tax strikes are hard to organise and much tax is collected automatically. If some organisation has the power to organise a tax strike, what are their political demands? Why wouldn't this just result in electoral victory for the Anti-Tax Party? Is there a general strike as well? There's no need to force people to buy US treasuries either, the open market can support a lot of demand and there is a lot of room to increase yields if they're not selling. Finally there is the option to simply "print", physically or virtually, in order to support operations. This runs the exchange rate down but since the US is pretty physically self-sufficient, especially in terms of oil production, food and pharmaceuticals, that's less of an immediate problem.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]