3 ms·

> You could even send cash in the mail. It would still use less energy than Bitcoin... Are you sure? What's the energy use of sending $1000 cash in the mail fr

> You could even send cash in the mail. It would still use less energy than Bitcoin... Are you sure? What's the energy use of sending $1000 cash in the mail from the US to France?

Wowfunhappy 6y ago
From another HN thread today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26090317 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26090317 > If you want to transfer money and the recipient is closer than 660 miles from you it's more efficient to just get a bunch of bills, drive there with a Tesla rather than send a Bitcoin transaction. Or alternatively 330 miles roundtrip. For each single transaction. France is further than 660 miles from the US, and airplanes use more energy than electric cars. However, letters are also shipped in bulk, dramatically cutting down on the energy use of an individual parcel. So, yes, even though I don't currently have the inclination to calculate the energy use of sending a letter to France, I am very confident it would be more efficient than sending Bitcoin.
- camjohnson26 6y ago
  You take on a lot more risk doing that though, there’s an advantage to doing it digitally. Faster and less likely to catastrophically fail.
- temp8964 6y ago
  I found all the answers to my questions unsatisfied. It seems everyone only see the transportation part of the work, but totally forgot human/machine processing at different stages. Mail doesn't just jump on a truck and then jump off the truck. The process is much more complicated and expensive than that.
  - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
    Sure, none of these answers are 100%, but IMO the rough calculation is so heavily against Bitcoin that I don't see how it could catch up.
    - camjohnson26 6y ago
      I don’t know about that, there’s so many advantages to a digital transaction over a physical one that you can accept a lot of extra cost. Send any amount of money in about 30 minutes with absolute guarantee that it won’t be rolled back is a powerful ability. Shipping boxes of cash may be cheaper in energy expenses but has lots of risks and inefficiencies of its own.
    - temp8964 6y ago
      Your assumption is that transportation takes the majority of the mailing cost. I don't think it is self-evident. Do you have any data to back it up?
gamblor956 6y ago
Presumably by plane? Carbon cost is apparently about 986 kg/passenger, based on average passenger weight of 60kg, so for a 0.5kg bundle of cash, that would be approximately 986/120 = 8.2kg of carbon to send a bundle of cash from NY to Paris, assuming it travels in the cargo hold.
bananabiscuit 6y ago
I’m guessing if you are putting the $1000 on it’s own private charter jet, then maybe it would cost more than a single btc transaction.
FabHK 6y ago
I found data hard to come by, but quick googling gives a carbon footprint of around 300 kg for one BTC transaction, and between 25-150 g for one letter sent (including production of the paper for letter and envelope). So BTC is around 1000 to 10000 times worse. Would be interesting to see it sourced/researched properly, but at first glance I'd say that, yes, it is much more efficient to send a letter, even if you drive to the mail box.

> You could even send cash in the mail. It would still use less energy than Bitcoin... Are you sure? What's the energy use of sending $1000 cash in the mail from the US to France?

Wowfunhappy 6y ago

From another HN thread today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26090317 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26090317 > If you want to transfer money and the recipient is closer than 660 miles from you it's more efficient to just get a bunch of bills, drive there with a Tesla rather than send a Bitcoin transaction. Or alternatively 330 miles roundtrip. For each single transaction. France is further than 660 miles from the US, and airplanes use more energy than electric cars. However, letters are also shipped in bulk, dramatically cutting down on the energy use of an individual parcel. So, yes, even though I don't currently have the inclination to calculate the energy use of sending a letter to France, I am very confident it would be more efficient than sending Bitcoin.

camjohnson26 6y ago
You take on a lot more risk doing that though, there’s an advantage to doing it digitally. Faster and less likely to catastrophically fail.
temp8964 6y ago
I found all the answers to my questions unsatisfied. It seems everyone only see the transportation part of the work, but totally forgot human/machine processing at different stages. Mail doesn't just jump on a truck and then jump off the truck. The process is much more complicated and expensive than that.
- Wowfunhappy 6y ago
  Sure, none of these answers are 100%, but IMO the rough calculation is so heavily against Bitcoin that I don't see how it could catch up.
  - camjohnson26 6y ago
    I don’t know about that, there’s so many advantages to a digital transaction over a physical one that you can accept a lot of extra cost. Send any amount of money in about 30 minutes with absolute guarantee that it won’t be rolled back is a powerful ability. Shipping boxes of cash may be cheaper in energy expenses but has lots of risks and inefficiencies of its own.
  - temp8964 6y ago
    Your assumption is that transportation takes the majority of the mailing cost. I don't think it is self-evident. Do you have any data to back it up?

gamblor956 6y ago

Presumably by plane? Carbon cost is apparently about 986 kg/passenger, based on average passenger weight of 60kg, so for a 0.5kg bundle of cash, that would be approximately 986/120 = 8.2kg of carbon to send a bundle of cash from NY to Paris, assuming it travels in the cargo hold.

bananabiscuit 6y ago

I’m guessing if you are putting the $1000 on it’s own private charter jet, then maybe it would cost more than a single btc transaction.

FabHK 6y ago

I found data hard to come by, but quick googling gives a carbon footprint of around 300 kg for one BTC transaction, and between 25-150 g for one letter sent (including production of the paper for letter and envelope). So BTC is around 1000 to 10000 times worse. Would be interesting to see it sourced/researched properly, but at first glance I'd say that, yes, it is much more efficient to send a letter, even if you drive to the mail box.