3 ms·

> It's hard to imagine that people haven't learned the value of having a robust local food supply chain, which is the one thing that I had hoped we had learned

by rat87 6y ago

> It's hard to imagine that people haven't learned the value of having a robust local food supply chain, which is the one thing that I had hoped we had learned after the shortages and panic buying created during the 1st wave of COVID. This seems like a worst case scenario, and it still seems like an overblown issue. I would say its usually much easier to just import produce if your country is not good at it. Use large ships and regulate them to be more energy efficient then they are now. It seems like we need solutions to panic buying --- Bitcoin in general doesn't seem very useful, making use of the captured heat is cool and better then wasting it but wouldn't it be easier just to not mine bitcoun

ovi256 6y ago
>This seems like a worst case scenario, and it still seems like an overblown issue. These are not overblown to people like military and civilian planners, who's jobs are setting up things during the good times so their country gets through the worst times like a global catastrophe or a world war. Having food security for years is essential for that. A pandemic like Covid-19 can severe supply chains for months. Their jobs is imagining what a Nipa virus pandemic or a world war could do. FWIW I have no particular opinion other that "huh interesting" about vertical farms and no idea about their role food security planning.
ClumsyPilot 6y ago
> "This seems like a worst case scenario." This and 'it's much easier to do X' is exactly the lax approach that gives us crisis after crisis when we are caught with our pants down and people die. "regulate them to be more energy efficient then they are now." Laws of physics do not obey congress, they will pollute unless we make them nuclear. And some countries are not even near an ocean.
imtringued 6y ago
Capturing bitcoin mining heat does not make it less energy intensive. If a bitcoin is worth X dollars it will always take X dollars worth of energy to produce a bitcoin. This is true even if you increase the efficiency of the miner.
- snovv_crash 6y ago
  Nope. Greenhouses use very low grade heat, so they can be run on 'waste heat' from pretty much anything, including server farms. The light they need is a different issue...

by rat87 6y ago

ovi256 6y ago

>This seems like a worst case scenario, and it still seems like an overblown issue. These are not overblown to people like military and civilian planners, who's jobs are setting up things during the good times so their country gets through the worst times like a global catastrophe or a world war. Having food security for years is essential for that. A pandemic like Covid-19 can severe supply chains for months. Their jobs is imagining what a Nipa virus pandemic or a world war could do. FWIW I have no particular opinion other that "huh interesting" about vertical farms and no idea about their role food security planning.

ClumsyPilot 6y ago

> "This seems like a worst case scenario." This and 'it's much easier to do X' is exactly the lax approach that gives us crisis after crisis when we are caught with our pants down and people die. "regulate them to be more energy efficient then they are now." Laws of physics do not obey congress, they will pollute unless we make them nuclear. And some countries are not even near an ocean.

imtringued 6y ago

Capturing bitcoin mining heat does not make it less energy intensive. If a bitcoin is worth X dollars it will always take X dollars worth of energy to produce a bitcoin. This is true even if you increase the efficiency of the miner.

snovv_crash 6y ago
Nope. Greenhouses use very low grade heat, so they can be run on 'waste heat' from pretty much anything, including server farms. The light they need is a different issue...