4 ms·
What's the carbon footprint of these things?
by jonnypotty 6y ago
What's the carbon footprint of these things?
- mcintyre1994 6y agoRarible uses the Ethereum blockchain: https://www.notion.so/rarible-com-FAQ-a47b276aa1994f7c8e3bc96d700717c5 https://www.notion.so/rarible-com-FAQ-a47b276aa1994f7c8e3bc9... So I guess it depends how much of the increase in Ethereum's energy consumption you put down to NFTs/their popularity. No idea how you'd calculate that but it's increased hugely the past few months: https://digiconomist.net/ethereum-energy-consumption https://digiconomist.net/ethereum-energy-consumption
- agumonkey 6y agoIf musk want to do good, let him produce solar panel based doge mining rigs. ©
- EGreg 6y agoSomeone tell me why you need the Ethereum blockchain for NFTs when you can just have non-divisible coins represent them, and be watched by a subset of the network instead of the whole network. I mean this is like transporting a beanie baby inside an armored truck with a convoy. It’s not like we need the history of all UTXOs ever, the coin may have changed hands like 100 times max, so it has an easily checked history. Same principle on Ethereum.
- dmitryminkovsky 6y ago> I mean this is like transporting a beanie baby inside an armored truck with a convoy. If I understand correctly, this is what sidechains are about? https://github.com/memo/eco-nft#still-using-ethereum https://github.com/memo/eco-nft#still-using-ethereum.
- EGreg 6y agoI like this section better: Using other blockchains: Instead of Ethereum, other blockchains are used. This can be up to hundreds of times better for the environment in terms of carbon footprint. Some of these chains include Algorand, Tezos, Polkadot and other PoS networks.
- dmitryminkovsky 6y agoYeah, but then isn't there a risk of any such network becoming popular and then you've got the same problem as with Ethereum?
- EGreg 6y agoNot at all, unless the network has a global bottleneck like a miner. Networks built on global blockchains are the problem. And if they use proof of work that’s even worse!
- dmitryminkovsky 6y agoOh I didn’t see PoS there. I didn’t know there were such networks out there in production.
- intotheabyss 6y agoJust a small point, Ethereum uses an account based system, not UTXOs. Also, NFTs are built on the ERC721 standard, which is a contract standard that allows composability between different NFTs and contracts.
- 67868018 6y agoBefore getting too concerned about the power usage of blockchain technology, go look at how much power generated in the USA is thrown away (rejected energy) https://www.llnl.gov/news/us-energy-use-rises-highest-level-ever https://www.llnl.gov/news/us-energy-use-rises-highest-level-...
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- georgyo 6y agoI don't think your comment implies what you think it implies. The wasted energy there is taking about inefficiencies in electronics and motors in general. Mining BTC is not 100% efficient either. If it was, the mining hardware wouldn't get hot, and it does get hot. So mining operations are producing a ton of waste heat as well.
- shetyeshail 6y agoI don't believe that means the power plant or company is throwing energy away, it means how much is lost to inefficient devices or processes, including at the end user. So the more efficient LED lights throw away less energy than the older incandescent bulbs, since we know we can literally feel the heat radiate off those. And since the heat isn't the intended function of that bulb, light is, that heat is just wasted energy. Since those Bitcoin blockchain calculations are pretty intense, they make your processor work hard. In doing so there is extra energy that literally gets wasted bc it heats up the processor, and again just like the bulb heat isn't the intended function so that heat byproduct is just wasted energy.
- skynet-9000 6y agoThese use Ethereum, not Bitcoin, and ETH is usually mined with GPUs, not CPUs. This isn't overly relevant to your point, since it probably doesn't matter too much in terms of power consumption per unit of work; GPUs consume huge amounts of power and generate lots of heat, just like CPUs, and often more.
- 67868018 6y ago
- dmitryminkovsky 6y agoI just found this last night: https://github.com/memo/eco-nft https://github.com/memo/eco-nft. From the README: > Selling work on a blockchain can be a technically challenging task. For this reason, many platforms and websites have emerged, aiming to make this process as seamless and easy as possible for artists. Unfortunately, currently many of these websites are based on the Ethereum blockchain, which is very inefficient and ecologically costly by design. E.g. selling just a single-edition artwork on Ethereum has a carbon footprint starting at around 100 KgCO2, which is equivalent to a 1 hour flight (and depending on the platform, can reach a long-haul flight) [2]. Selling an edition of 100 works has a carbon footprint of over 10 tonnes CO2, which is more than the per capita annual footprint of someone in the EU - including all emissions from industry and trade [3].
- intotheabyss 6y agoEthereum is moving to proof of stake, so this whole carbon footprint concern is going to go away.
- ksm1717 6y agoAnd I’m going to be a millionaire so I don’t pay rent anymore
- gegtik 6y agoGood point - we should start supporting Etherium when it's moral to do so
- DonHopkins 6y agoBut is all the carbon it's already produced going to just magically go away too? And what about all the carbon from all the hot air produced by all the people repeating "this whole carbon footprint concern is going to go away" again and again, for so many years?
- intotheabyss 6y agoConsidering NFTs are on Ethereum: soon to be insignificant, since Ethereum is already running the Beacon Chain (proof of stake network) and the merge from Eth 1 to Eth 2 will occur sometime later this year.