3 ms·

looked at a map lately?

tsimionescu 6y ago
It could be an opportunity to invest in new mechanisms of power distribution, and be on the forefront of research in this area. It could also find more productive uses of this electricity, such as supercomputing clusters or lasers used for research.
- yownie 6y ago
  We are located too far from major client population centers for any Data hosting to make sense, you'd always deal with higher latency to either the US or European users vs hosting in those places. Few submarine cable connections (which cost hundreds of millions to run) mean high data costs versus well connected cities such as Hamburg or London or NYC. You do realize that transmitting power via cable means moving it through large bodies of salt water (the ocean) that contribute to huge losses in EMF resistance. Not to mention a power cable from Iceland to anywhere else in the world would be 2x as long as the longest power transmission ever created. It's more scary for me to realize you actually have no productive ideas for a country that mines BTC from renewables but STILL think you're insights are correct. Did you know what we do with the electricity here before mining was popular? Alcoa Aluminum smelting, Ever check out the environmental impact on smelting?
  - tsimionescu 6y ago
    There's also the option of just not generating the energy. I doubt the smelters were closed to make room for bitcoin miners. Reading more about this, it seems that environmental groups in Iceland are fighting the expansion of bitcoin because it is directly driving extra demand for electricity, not simply using the existing production[0] - another obvious problem if we start looking at the environment even beyond global warming. Bitcoin mining is not replacing the Aluminum smelters, it is competing with them for electricity[1], while currently not paying much of anything to the local government[2] and hiring next to no people, like most tech industries. I'll add that I specifically mentioned scientific data centers, supercomputers, which would be much less affected by lag than an AWS region. For the power transfer issue, I specifically said that attacking the problem would mean being at the forefront of research on the matter. And it is not my place to have productive ideas for how a country could use its natural resources. My claim was that bitcoin mining should be stopped as soon as possible, as it is driving an overall increase in power needs for the entire world, at a time we should be looking for every possible means to reduce our energy consumption. You came and brought up the extremely singular case of Iceland, as if it disproved anything. It's not like Iceland's economy is dependent on bitcoin, it's an extremely new industry that is not making a huge dent, while consuming more energy than the whole country's housing. In the end Iceland is irrelevant in the discussion of Bitcoin's impact on the world. [0] https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2019/4/15/iceland-is-a-bitcoin-miners-haven-but-not-everyone-is-happy https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2019/4/15/iceland-is-a-bi... [1] https://grist.org/article/bitcoin-gobbles-up-clean-energy-just-when-the-real-world-needs-it-most/ https://grist.org/article/bitcoin-gobbles-up-clean-energy-ju... [2] https://www.mprnews.org/story/2018/02/14/iceland-bitcoin-energy-mining https://www.mprnews.org/story/2018/02/14/iceland-bitcoin-ene...
    - yownie 6y ago
      > it seems that environmental groups in Iceland are fighting the expansion of bitcoin because it is directly driving extra demand for electricity, not simply using the existing production As someone who lives and works here I can assure you there is absolutely no environmental group fighting the expasion of btc mining here in Iceland, we are however viciously fighting the increasingly destruction tourism influx that has been happening since 2012. It does far more damage that the dams that were built here well before btc mining even existed. >while currently not paying much of anything to the local government[2] and hiring next to no people, like most tech industries. This is also untrue, construction and remote hands as well as grid infrastructures resulted from them, the companies that run the facilities also incorporate here and pay corp and employee tax here. >And it is not my place to have productive ideas for how a country could use its natural resources. My claim was that bitcoin mining should be stopped as soon as possible, as it is driving an overall increase in power needs for the entire world, at a time we should be looking for every possible means to reduce our energy consumption. If you followed your own citations you'd see one of them linked to https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption which shows est electric consumption going back as far as 2018. Notice the graph has not really changed since 2018 (since the last halving). >You came and brought up the extremely singular case of Iceland, as if it disproved anything. In the end Iceland is irrelevant in the discussion of Bitcoin's impact on the world. Again your OWN source has Iceland listed as one of the top mining locations in the world of course it's relevant. I've even read estimates that 40% of bitcoin mining is coming from renewable sources, most during off peak season where that electricity would be wasted otherwise. You want to solve the energy efficiency problems of the world? Good, begin by linking the disparate energy grids amongst the world to eliminate peak usage and off peak waste, you'll save far more electricity just by that way. Not by knee-jerk "I see no value in this so it must have no value" vague emotional appeals on the internet. All I see is you vaguely groping for why it should be treated differently than any other form of industry or innovation while insisting all the rest are somehow necessary and this not. You're not even consistent in your reasons from reply to reply.

It could be an opportunity to invest in new mechanisms of power distribution, and be on the forefront of research in this area. It could also find more productive uses of this electricity, such as supercomputing clusters or lasers used for research.

yownie 6y ago
We are located too far from major client population centers for any Data hosting to make sense, you'd always deal with higher latency to either the US or European users vs hosting in those places. Few submarine cable connections (which cost hundreds of millions to run) mean high data costs versus well connected cities such as Hamburg or London or NYC. You do realize that transmitting power via cable means moving it through large bodies of salt water (the ocean) that contribute to huge losses in EMF resistance. Not to mention a power cable from Iceland to anywhere else in the world would be 2x as long as the longest power transmission ever created. It's more scary for me to realize you actually have no productive ideas for a country that mines BTC from renewables but STILL think you're insights are correct. Did you know what we do with the electricity here before mining was popular? Alcoa Aluminum smelting, Ever check out the environmental impact on smelting?
- tsimionescu 6y ago
  There's also the option of just not generating the energy. I doubt the smelters were closed to make room for bitcoin miners. Reading more about this, it seems that environmental groups in Iceland are fighting the expansion of bitcoin because it is directly driving extra demand for electricity, not simply using the existing production[0] - another obvious problem if we start looking at the environment even beyond global warming. Bitcoin mining is not replacing the Aluminum smelters, it is competing with them for electricity[1], while currently not paying much of anything to the local government[2] and hiring next to no people, like most tech industries. I'll add that I specifically mentioned scientific data centers, supercomputers, which would be much less affected by lag than an AWS region. For the power transfer issue, I specifically said that attacking the problem would mean being at the forefront of research on the matter. And it is not my place to have productive ideas for how a country could use its natural resources. My claim was that bitcoin mining should be stopped as soon as possible, as it is driving an overall increase in power needs for the entire world, at a time we should be looking for every possible means to reduce our energy consumption. You came and brought up the extremely singular case of Iceland, as if it disproved anything. It's not like Iceland's economy is dependent on bitcoin, it's an extremely new industry that is not making a huge dent, while consuming more energy than the whole country's housing. In the end Iceland is irrelevant in the discussion of Bitcoin's impact on the world. [0] https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2019/4/15/iceland-is-a-bitcoin-miners-haven-but-not-everyone-is-happy https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2019/4/15/iceland-is-a-bi... [1] https://grist.org/article/bitcoin-gobbles-up-clean-energy-just-when-the-real-world-needs-it-most/ https://grist.org/article/bitcoin-gobbles-up-clean-energy-ju... [2] https://www.mprnews.org/story/2018/02/14/iceland-bitcoin-energy-mining https://www.mprnews.org/story/2018/02/14/iceland-bitcoin-ene...
  - yownie 6y ago
    > it seems that environmental groups in Iceland are fighting the expansion of bitcoin because it is directly driving extra demand for electricity, not simply using the existing production As someone who lives and works here I can assure you there is absolutely no environmental group fighting the expasion of btc mining here in Iceland, we are however viciously fighting the increasingly destruction tourism influx that has been happening since 2012. It does far more damage that the dams that were built here well before btc mining even existed. >while currently not paying much of anything to the local government[2] and hiring next to no people, like most tech industries. This is also untrue, construction and remote hands as well as grid infrastructures resulted from them, the companies that run the facilities also incorporate here and pay corp and employee tax here. >And it is not my place to have productive ideas for how a country could use its natural resources. My claim was that bitcoin mining should be stopped as soon as possible, as it is driving an overall increase in power needs for the entire world, at a time we should be looking for every possible means to reduce our energy consumption. If you followed your own citations you'd see one of them linked to https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption which shows est electric consumption going back as far as 2018. Notice the graph has not really changed since 2018 (since the last halving). >You came and brought up the extremely singular case of Iceland, as if it disproved anything. In the end Iceland is irrelevant in the discussion of Bitcoin's impact on the world. Again your OWN source has Iceland listed as one of the top mining locations in the world of course it's relevant. I've even read estimates that 40% of bitcoin mining is coming from renewable sources, most during off peak season where that electricity would be wasted otherwise. You want to solve the energy efficiency problems of the world? Good, begin by linking the disparate energy grids amongst the world to eliminate peak usage and off peak waste, you'll save far more electricity just by that way. Not by knee-jerk "I see no value in this so it must have no value" vague emotional appeals on the internet. All I see is you vaguely groping for why it should be treated differently than any other form of industry or innovation while insisting all the rest are somehow necessary and this not. You're not even consistent in your reasons from reply to reply.