4 ms·

My understanding is that the vast majority of crypto mining happens at dedicated farms in energy cost optimal locations such as Iceland where you can have clean

My understanding is that the vast majority of crypto mining happens at dedicated farms in energy cost optimal locations such as Iceland where you can have clean geothermal energy. I haven't seen an analysis that looks at actual mining facilities carbon costs vs. a general average figure of CO/2 emissions per energy unit which absolutely would not apply in this case.

PragmaticPulp 6y ago
That's the narrative being pushed to distract from the massive scale of Bitcoin's energy usage, but it's largely a myth. Yes, some Bitcoin mines use cheap renewable energy. However, renewable energy isn't free. If it wasn't going to mining, it would be transferred through the power grid to other locations that rely on non-renewable energy sources. > the vast majority of crypto mining happens at dedicated farms in energy cost optimal locations such as Iceland where you can have clean geothermal energy To put it in perspective, the energy usage of: Bitcoin network: 121.36 TWh per year All of Iceland: 18.68 TWh per year. Bitcoin uses 6.5X more energy than the entire country of Iceland combined.
- emteycz 6y ago
  Have you forgotten about the existence of China (and its enormous hydro-dams)? Nobody suggested Iceland is the sole location of Bitcoin mining. > it would be transferred through the power grid to other locations that rely on non-renewable energy sources. Not at all. Electricity is not easy to transport nor store. Do you know there are many days with negative prices of electricity in many locations in EU, because the electricity can't be economically transported even across the rather small region? > Bitcoin uses 6.5X more energy than the entire country of Iceland combined. Given the benefit of Bitcoin, that's excellent!
  - PragmaticPulp 6y ago
    We transport electricity all the time, and we get better at it every year. Do you live next to a power plant? Or even in sight of a power plant? No, because we have a power grid to move this electricity around. I can assure you that new power generation plants are built with electricity transportation in mind. Surely you don't think that power plants are being built in the middle of nowhere with absolutely no way to use the electricity until Bitcoin conveniently came along with power-intensive proof-of-work requirements? > Have you forgot about the existence of China (and its enormous hydro-dams)? Please don't be facetious. Obviously I have not "forgotten" about China. However, you can surely agree we'd all be better off if new hydroelectric power was used to take older fossil fuel plants offline rather than performing arbitrary proof-of-work calculations.
    - emteycz 6y ago
      > Do you live next to a power plant? Or even in sight of a power plant? No, because we have a power grid to move this electricity around. Of course I do. There are solars and wind turbines all around me, not even talking about the natural gas and coal powerplants I can see right out of my window near the edge of the city. And every year there are many gigawatts of electricity from these exact powerplants right next to me that go to waste because it can't be transported nor stored economically. Thankfully now there are some Bitcoin miners paying at least something for some of that waste electricity, so my own electricity can be cheaper. > Surely you don't think that power plants are being built in the middle of nowhere with absolutely no way to use the electricity I don't think that's what's happening. Powerplants are built close to human settlements. Even very nasty fossil fuel powered powerplants are right there. Even the nuclear powerplants are very close to major settlements. Surely we would've built them very far away if that was a possibility. Chernobyl was the one exception, because it secretly powered a gigantic radar called Duga. > However, you can surely agree we'd all be better off if new hydroelectric power was used to take older fossil fuel plants offline rather than performing arbitrary proof-of-work calculations. I can assure you there isn't a single Bitcoin miner preventing that. The reasons are different - it's not easy to transport or store electricity. Any electricity used for Bitcoin mining is waste electricity - electricity that can't be put into the grid for profit and would be generated anyways, regardless of Bitcoin. It's not economical to mine Bitcoin with ordinary grid electricity. > Please don't be facetious. Obviously I have not "forgotten" about China Why have you tried to compare Iceland's total energy output with Bitcoin energy consumption, then? That doesn't make any sense if you had China in mind. When I look at wholesale electricity prices, it's 3 times more than you can earn with Bitcoin mining. Please explain to me: Why would powerplants not use electricity for profit if they could? Or are you saying that Bitcoin miners are losing money to mine Bitcoin?
      - ncmncm 6y ago
        Bitcoin miners are often, instead, stealing the power used to mine. We are more used to this for Monero coins, where the equipment used is fleets of hijacked PCs, but bitcoin miners using custom equipment are not less clever than Monero miners. People are paying for the power, just not the same people as are getting the bitcoins mined with it. This is easier to arrange in places with more retail corruption, like China, Russia, and Venezuela, than in (say) the US, where corruption is wholesale, concentrated higher up. But mining on US military bases and naval vessels, by contractors, is probably not negligible; or at commercial nuke plants where the marginal cost of generation is negligible and ratepayers have already been robbed to pay for construction. The variety of ways found to steal abstract property has always been very, very large, and bitcoin miners are not a bit shy. We cannot assume the stolen power is all or mostly renewable. For example, we may guess that Venezuelan, Nigerian, and Saudi mining uses power from oil, Russian largely from gas, Chinese from coal. The fraction of bitcoins mined from stolen power may be estimated by comparing the market value of new coins to the retail value of the power that was needed to produce them.
- ekianjo 6y ago
  Iceland is not a very large or even dense country to begin with so 6x of their energy consumption does not tell you much.
- JoshTko 6y ago
  Half of Iceland's electricity is already from bitcoin mining so at the very least 1/12 of total bitcoin mining is from geothermal. The first youtube hit for bitcoin mine gives another operation in the US using hydro electricity. Any operations using costly electricity will quickly be put out of business of more efficient operations as mining hardware prices matches demand.
  - sollewitt 6y ago
    But we could be using that _to be becoming carbon neutral_
    - lumost 6y ago
      On the flip side, the extra grid demand for renewable energy in optimal locations may accelerate renewable adoption. Grids and infrastructure are not free.
      - davidgerard 6y ago
        That's like saying that extra smoking accelerates cancer research. Yes, or you could not do the foolish thing.
    - JoshTko 6y ago
      Agree. Just am pointing out that the energy consumption of bitcoin seems to be vastly overstated, possibly by an order of magnitude.

PragmaticPulp 6y ago

That's the narrative being pushed to distract from the massive scale of Bitcoin's energy usage, but it's largely a myth. Yes, some Bitcoin mines use cheap renewable energy. However, renewable energy isn't free. If it wasn't going to mining, it would be transferred through the power grid to other locations that rely on non-renewable energy sources. > the vast majority of crypto mining happens at dedicated farms in energy cost optimal locations such as Iceland where you can have clean geothermal energy To put it in perspective, the energy usage of: Bitcoin network: 121.36 TWh per year All of Iceland: 18.68 TWh per year. Bitcoin uses 6.5X more energy than the entire country of Iceland combined.

emteycz 6y ago
Have you forgotten about the existence of China (and its enormous hydro-dams)? Nobody suggested Iceland is the sole location of Bitcoin mining. > it would be transferred through the power grid to other locations that rely on non-renewable energy sources. Not at all. Electricity is not easy to transport nor store. Do you know there are many days with negative prices of electricity in many locations in EU, because the electricity can't be economically transported even across the rather small region? > Bitcoin uses 6.5X more energy than the entire country of Iceland combined. Given the benefit of Bitcoin, that's excellent!
- PragmaticPulp 6y ago
  We transport electricity all the time, and we get better at it every year. Do you live next to a power plant? Or even in sight of a power plant? No, because we have a power grid to move this electricity around. I can assure you that new power generation plants are built with electricity transportation in mind. Surely you don't think that power plants are being built in the middle of nowhere with absolutely no way to use the electricity until Bitcoin conveniently came along with power-intensive proof-of-work requirements? > Have you forgot about the existence of China (and its enormous hydro-dams)? Please don't be facetious. Obviously I have not "forgotten" about China. However, you can surely agree we'd all be better off if new hydroelectric power was used to take older fossil fuel plants offline rather than performing arbitrary proof-of-work calculations.
  - emteycz 6y ago
    > Do you live next to a power plant? Or even in sight of a power plant? No, because we have a power grid to move this electricity around. Of course I do. There are solars and wind turbines all around me, not even talking about the natural gas and coal powerplants I can see right out of my window near the edge of the city. And every year there are many gigawatts of electricity from these exact powerplants right next to me that go to waste because it can't be transported nor stored economically. Thankfully now there are some Bitcoin miners paying at least something for some of that waste electricity, so my own electricity can be cheaper. > Surely you don't think that power plants are being built in the middle of nowhere with absolutely no way to use the electricity I don't think that's what's happening. Powerplants are built close to human settlements. Even very nasty fossil fuel powered powerplants are right there. Even the nuclear powerplants are very close to major settlements. Surely we would've built them very far away if that was a possibility. Chernobyl was the one exception, because it secretly powered a gigantic radar called Duga. > However, you can surely agree we'd all be better off if new hydroelectric power was used to take older fossil fuel plants offline rather than performing arbitrary proof-of-work calculations. I can assure you there isn't a single Bitcoin miner preventing that. The reasons are different - it's not easy to transport or store electricity. Any electricity used for Bitcoin mining is waste electricity - electricity that can't be put into the grid for profit and would be generated anyways, regardless of Bitcoin. It's not economical to mine Bitcoin with ordinary grid electricity. > Please don't be facetious. Obviously I have not "forgotten" about China Why have you tried to compare Iceland's total energy output with Bitcoin energy consumption, then? That doesn't make any sense if you had China in mind. When I look at wholesale electricity prices, it's 3 times more than you can earn with Bitcoin mining. Please explain to me: Why would powerplants not use electricity for profit if they could? Or are you saying that Bitcoin miners are losing money to mine Bitcoin?
    - ncmncm 6y ago
      Bitcoin miners are often, instead, stealing the power used to mine. We are more used to this for Monero coins, where the equipment used is fleets of hijacked PCs, but bitcoin miners using custom equipment are not less clever than Monero miners. People are paying for the power, just not the same people as are getting the bitcoins mined with it. This is easier to arrange in places with more retail corruption, like China, Russia, and Venezuela, than in (say) the US, where corruption is wholesale, concentrated higher up. But mining on US military bases and naval vessels, by contractors, is probably not negligible; or at commercial nuke plants where the marginal cost of generation is negligible and ratepayers have already been robbed to pay for construction. The variety of ways found to steal abstract property has always been very, very large, and bitcoin miners are not a bit shy. We cannot assume the stolen power is all or mostly renewable. For example, we may guess that Venezuelan, Nigerian, and Saudi mining uses power from oil, Russian largely from gas, Chinese from coal. The fraction of bitcoins mined from stolen power may be estimated by comparing the market value of new coins to the retail value of the power that was needed to produce them.
ekianjo 6y ago
Iceland is not a very large or even dense country to begin with so 6x of their energy consumption does not tell you much.
JoshTko 6y ago
Half of Iceland's electricity is already from bitcoin mining so at the very least 1/12 of total bitcoin mining is from geothermal. The first youtube hit for bitcoin mine gives another operation in the US using hydro electricity. Any operations using costly electricity will quickly be put out of business of more efficient operations as mining hardware prices matches demand.
- sollewitt 6y ago
  But we could be using that _to be becoming carbon neutral_
  - lumost 6y ago
    On the flip side, the extra grid demand for renewable energy in optimal locations may accelerate renewable adoption. Grids and infrastructure are not free.
    - davidgerard 6y ago
      That's like saying that extra smoking accelerates cancer research. Yes, or you could not do the foolish thing.
  - JoshTko 6y ago
    Agree. Just am pointing out that the energy consumption of bitcoin seems to be vastly overstated, possibly by an order of magnitude.