4 ms·

> The CCAF team surveys the people who manage the Bitcoin network around the world on their energy use and found that about two-thirds of it is from fossil fuel

> The CCAF team surveys the people who manage the Bitcoin network around the world on their energy use and found that about two-thirds of it is from fossil fuels. Nice to see actual data on this. Bitcoin advocates keep claiming it's mostly renewable.

Aachen 6y ago
If that were true, we'd be seeing fluctuations in how frequently blocks are being created depending on where the sun shines and where it's windy. Water power is more stable but not enough to explain the TWhs all disappearing into bitcoin every year. No need to do a lot of work surveying miners to disprove these trolls, also they'll just come up with a new argument like that it's the payment method of the future and they don't want to miss out on that (that's what people threw at me on reddit in a similar thread earlier today)... just admit it, btc investors, you want to use the investment vessel and not feel bad about the enormous amount of pollution you cause in the process...
- sp332 6y ago
  I am kinda surprised it's not higher, just because solar and wind energy is so cheap now I assumed it would be attractive. That said, even if it was run with renewable energy, at this point in time it would still contribute to emissions indirectly. That power could have been used to displace fossil fuel usage, so diverting it to bitcoin hashing causes a net emissions increase for... very little benefit.
  - packetlost 6y ago
    Not to mention the eWaste created by all the useless ASICs, burned out graphics cards, and wonky otherwise-useless motherboards.
- rntksi 6y ago
  I find it funny that in every post that denounces the energy use of bitcoin, which is one of its apparent weakness and strength at the same time, there are what I'd call "apologists" who come in and give other reasonings to support bitcoin, ignoring facts that go against it. Let's be honest with each other: - The reason why bitcoin is revolutionary is because it opens up a way to do transactions on a ledger between millions of people without a central authority. Even if you say owning 51% of the network means you are the central authority, you have to keep pushing those resources forever, basically impossible to happen in a "struggle" situation. - The reason that in itself is its weakness is because it relies on computational proof of work, and that means energy. The more people are involved in bitcoins the more energy will be consumed to vie for the possibility of mining out rewards, to the point where the costs doesn't make sense anymore and you have to rethink mining strategy. Any system that proposes a central authority to lessen this energy use burden is just making it weaker, not stronger, if you care about decentralised transaction systems. That's why it's both a weakness and strength.
throwawayQuwcy 6y ago
I don't think actual data is possible, only estimates. Any data would have to be self-reported by miners which can operate 100% anonymously
UncleMeat 6y ago
Even this doesn't matter much. Nuclear, wind, and solar are all frequently criticized because they do not have the ability to scale with demand. We can think of all of these energy sources as fixed, with all of the marginal energy use coming from CO2 emitting sources. If you use one fewer watt of power, virtually all of that savings is in coal and gas. This is why reducing power usage is so important.

Aachen 6y ago

If that were true, we'd be seeing fluctuations in how frequently blocks are being created depending on where the sun shines and where it's windy. Water power is more stable but not enough to explain the TWhs all disappearing into bitcoin every year. No need to do a lot of work surveying miners to disprove these trolls, also they'll just come up with a new argument like that it's the payment method of the future and they don't want to miss out on that (that's what people threw at me on reddit in a similar thread earlier today)... just admit it, btc investors, you want to use the investment vessel and not feel bad about the enormous amount of pollution you cause in the process...

sp332 6y ago
I am kinda surprised it's not higher, just because solar and wind energy is so cheap now I assumed it would be attractive. That said, even if it was run with renewable energy, at this point in time it would still contribute to emissions indirectly. That power could have been used to displace fossil fuel usage, so diverting it to bitcoin hashing causes a net emissions increase for... very little benefit.
- packetlost 6y ago
  Not to mention the eWaste created by all the useless ASICs, burned out graphics cards, and wonky otherwise-useless motherboards.
rntksi 6y ago
I find it funny that in every post that denounces the energy use of bitcoin, which is one of its apparent weakness and strength at the same time, there are what I'd call "apologists" who come in and give other reasonings to support bitcoin, ignoring facts that go against it. Let's be honest with each other: - The reason why bitcoin is revolutionary is because it opens up a way to do transactions on a ledger between millions of people without a central authority. Even if you say owning 51% of the network means you are the central authority, you have to keep pushing those resources forever, basically impossible to happen in a "struggle" situation. - The reason that in itself is its weakness is because it relies on computational proof of work, and that means energy. The more people are involved in bitcoins the more energy will be consumed to vie for the possibility of mining out rewards, to the point where the costs doesn't make sense anymore and you have to rethink mining strategy. Any system that proposes a central authority to lessen this energy use burden is just making it weaker, not stronger, if you care about decentralised transaction systems. That's why it's both a weakness and strength.

throwawayQuwcy 6y ago

I don't think actual data is possible, only estimates. Any data would have to be self-reported by miners which can operate 100% anonymously

UncleMeat 6y ago

Even this doesn't matter much. Nuclear, wind, and solar are all frequently criticized because they do not have the ability to scale with demand. We can think of all of these energy sources as fixed, with all of the marginal energy use coming from CO2 emitting sources. If you use one fewer watt of power, virtually all of that savings is in coal and gas. This is why reducing power usage is so important.