5 ms·

Yea, I did a similar analysis on the energy wasted due to the new reddit layout (I got 3 TWh per year, or ~10% of bitcoin electricity usage): https://news.ycomb

by nonbel 8y ago

Yea, I did a similar analysis on the energy wasted due to the new reddit layout (I got 3 TWh per year, or ~10% of bitcoin electricity usage): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17619025 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17619025 I'd love to see someone go more in depth with these types of "how much energy is wasted on x" estimates. Including just addressable grid and power plant inefficiencies. I suspect bitcoin is simply not a big deal (at this point), so this entire issue is concern trolling. And then you come to the problem of what it means for the electricity to be "wasted". Eg, is going to church "wasting electricity"? What about the entire alcohol industry? Playing videogames? Preparing and storing deserts?

A2017U1 8y ago
There's many criticisms to make about cryptocurrencies, but people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. (I live in a country which uses more energy per capita then virtually every country on Earth) https://phys.org/news/2015-12-christmas-energy-entire-countries.html https://phys.org/news/2015-12-christmas-energy-entire-countr...
viraptor 8y ago
> I suspect bitcoin is simply not a big deal (at this point), so this entire issue is concern trolling. Or people actually care. The fact there are existing, worse ways to use energy doesn't mean we shouldn't care about Bitcoin. For the same reason I'm composting, even though the nearby supermarket throws out way more packaged food than I'd ever buy.
- nonbel 8y ago
  >"The fact there are existing, worse ways to use energy doesn't mean we shouldn't care about Bitcoin." Its more like you are trying to catch rainwater in a strainer full of holes but are worried about a tiny pinhole in the side. So sure people may actually care about it, it just makes no sense and living your life that way is not a recipe for success. For 2013 we have the estimate for total energy supply of 157,500 TWh/yr https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_consumption https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_consumption Lets say bitcoin used 1000 TWh/yr worldwide (~15-30x what is estimated to use now). That'd work out to: 100*1000/157,500 ~ 0.63 % Currently its more like 0.02-0.04%. As someone else posted, just christmas lights in the US alone is ~6 TWh/yr (~.004%). EDIT: That energy supply number is actually TPES, which ignores efficiency: "Closely related to energy consumption is the concept of total primary energy supply (TPES), which - on a global level - is the sum of energy production minus storage changes. Since changes of energy storage over the year are minor, TPES values can be used as an estimator for energy consumption. However, TPES ignores conversion efficiency, overstating forms of energy with poor conversion efficiency (e.g. coal, gas and nuclear) and understating forms already accounted for in converted forms (e.g. photovoltaic or hydroelectricity)." I suspect that if mining encourages even tiny innovations in power plant and grid efficiency it will have a net negative effect on energy waste. Apparently its that about 65% is lost due to powerplant, and 10% due to transmission/distribution, for ~75% total: http://insideenergy.org/2015/11/06/lost-in-transmission-how-much-electricity-disappears-between-a-power-plant-and-your-plug/ http://insideenergy.org/2015/11/06/lost-in-transmission-how-...
  - hcknwscommenter 8y ago
    "if mining encourages even tiny innovations in power plant and grid efficiency " But it won't. All the incentives to increase power plant and grid efficiency are already there. Moreover, as you state quite clearly, bitcoin energy use is a small proportion of energy usage.
    - nonbel 8y ago
      Mining is somewhat unique in that it doesnt really matter where it is done and it is very easy to tie profitability to electricity cost (since that is the main cost). So I disagree, at least if it gets big enough to matter. I'd expect power plants, towns, etc to find it more worthwhile to invest in more efficient tech to attract the miners.
      - viraptor 8y ago
        Why would they want to attract? The article summarises it well: ignores local workforce, requires resources, can relocate quickly - it doesn't sound useful for the towns.
        nonbel 8y ago
        Obviously to make money... Towns with weird subsidizing schemes going on won't be able to take advantage unless they account for the new opportunity.
        hcknwscommenter 8y ago
        Only if they tax the heck out of mining. How well do you think that is going to work?
  - hcknwscommenter 8y ago
    "Lets say bitcoin used 1000 TWh/yr worldwide (~15-30x what is estimated to use now). That'd work out to: 100*1000/157,500 ~ 0.63 % Currently its more like 0.02-0.04%. As someone else posted, just christmas lights in the US alone is ~6 TWh/yr (~.004%)." So, THREE ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE are no big deal? Okay.
deadmetheny 8y ago
>Including just addressable grid and power plant inefficiencies. I suspect bitcoin is simply not a big deal (at this point), so this entire issue is concern trolling. This isn't a zero-sum game. We can address multiple inefficiencies. Bitcoin is just one of the more flagrant sources of tech-based waste that doesn't actually benefit anyone. >And then you come to the problem of what it means for the electricity to be "wasted". Nobody's going to ever fully agree but I think we can reach a quorum agreeing that fake money made up by libertarians who think a couple hundred years of bank regulations are totally gay bullshit put in place purely to stifle people and not to address totally legitimate concerns of abusive behaviour is enough of a waste to curtail it. > Eg, is going to church "wasting electricity"? What about the entire alcohol industry? Playing videogames? Preparing and storing deserts? Alcohol and food are tangible physical products that have had demand for thousands of years, video games are entertainment, and church builds community. Some people will have problems with all of these, but they are almost certainly going to be the minority.
- nonbel 8y ago
  Thanks, I appreciate this more honest position. You dont like energy being used on bitcoin because you dont like bitcoin. If enough people think that way then it should be considered "waste". Simple enough, but what is enough people, 50%?
gruez 8y ago
your link's off, it links to the parent rather than your comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17619264 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17619264

by nonbel 8y ago

A2017U1 8y ago

There's many criticisms to make about cryptocurrencies, but people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. (I live in a country which uses more energy per capita then virtually every country on Earth) https://phys.org/news/2015-12-christmas-energy-entire-countries.html https://phys.org/news/2015-12-christmas-energy-entire-countr...

viraptor 8y ago

> I suspect bitcoin is simply not a big deal (at this point), so this entire issue is concern trolling. Or people actually care. The fact there are existing, worse ways to use energy doesn't mean we shouldn't care about Bitcoin. For the same reason I'm composting, even though the nearby supermarket throws out way more packaged food than I'd ever buy.

nonbel 8y ago
>"The fact there are existing, worse ways to use energy doesn't mean we shouldn't care about Bitcoin." Its more like you are trying to catch rainwater in a strainer full of holes but are worried about a tiny pinhole in the side. So sure people may actually care about it, it just makes no sense and living your life that way is not a recipe for success. For 2013 we have the estimate for total energy supply of 157,500 TWh/yr https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_consumption https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_consumption Lets say bitcoin used 1000 TWh/yr worldwide (~15-30x what is estimated to use now). That'd work out to: 100*1000/157,500 ~ 0.63 % Currently its more like 0.02-0.04%. As someone else posted, just christmas lights in the US alone is ~6 TWh/yr (~.004%). EDIT: That energy supply number is actually TPES, which ignores efficiency: "Closely related to energy consumption is the concept of total primary energy supply (TPES), which - on a global level - is the sum of energy production minus storage changes. Since changes of energy storage over the year are minor, TPES values can be used as an estimator for energy consumption. However, TPES ignores conversion efficiency, overstating forms of energy with poor conversion efficiency (e.g. coal, gas and nuclear) and understating forms already accounted for in converted forms (e.g. photovoltaic or hydroelectricity)." I suspect that if mining encourages even tiny innovations in power plant and grid efficiency it will have a net negative effect on energy waste. Apparently its that about 65% is lost due to powerplant, and 10% due to transmission/distribution, for ~75% total: http://insideenergy.org/2015/11/06/lost-in-transmission-how-much-electricity-disappears-between-a-power-plant-and-your-plug/ http://insideenergy.org/2015/11/06/lost-in-transmission-how-...
- hcknwscommenter 8y ago
  "if mining encourages even tiny innovations in power plant and grid efficiency " But it won't. All the incentives to increase power plant and grid efficiency are already there. Moreover, as you state quite clearly, bitcoin energy use is a small proportion of energy usage.
  - nonbel 8y ago
    Mining is somewhat unique in that it doesnt really matter where it is done and it is very easy to tie profitability to electricity cost (since that is the main cost). So I disagree, at least if it gets big enough to matter. I'd expect power plants, towns, etc to find it more worthwhile to invest in more efficient tech to attract the miners.
    - viraptor 8y ago
      Why would they want to attract? The article summarises it well: ignores local workforce, requires resources, can relocate quickly - it doesn't sound useful for the towns.
      - nonbel 8y ago
        Obviously to make money... Towns with weird subsidizing schemes going on won't be able to take advantage unless they account for the new opportunity.
        hcknwscommenter 8y ago
        Only if they tax the heck out of mining. How well do you think that is going to work?
- hcknwscommenter 8y ago
  "Lets say bitcoin used 1000 TWh/yr worldwide (~15-30x what is estimated to use now). That'd work out to: 100*1000/157,500 ~ 0.63 % Currently its more like 0.02-0.04%. As someone else posted, just christmas lights in the US alone is ~6 TWh/yr (~.004%)." So, THREE ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE are no big deal? Okay.

deadmetheny 8y ago

>Including just addressable grid and power plant inefficiencies. I suspect bitcoin is simply not a big deal (at this point), so this entire issue is concern trolling. This isn't a zero-sum game. We can address multiple inefficiencies. Bitcoin is just one of the more flagrant sources of tech-based waste that doesn't actually benefit anyone. >And then you come to the problem of what it means for the electricity to be "wasted". Nobody's going to ever fully agree but I think we can reach a quorum agreeing that fake money made up by libertarians who think a couple hundred years of bank regulations are totally gay bullshit put in place purely to stifle people and not to address totally legitimate concerns of abusive behaviour is enough of a waste to curtail it. > Eg, is going to church "wasting electricity"? What about the entire alcohol industry? Playing videogames? Preparing and storing deserts? Alcohol and food are tangible physical products that have had demand for thousands of years, video games are entertainment, and church builds community. Some people will have problems with all of these, but they are almost certainly going to be the minority.

nonbel 8y ago
Thanks, I appreciate this more honest position. You dont like energy being used on bitcoin because you dont like bitcoin. If enough people think that way then it should be considered "waste". Simple enough, but what is enough people, 50%?

gruez 8y ago

your link's off, it links to the parent rather than your comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17619264 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17619264