6 ms·

> the National Mine Safety Supervision Bureau has reported three recent coal mine accidents, including an April 10 “water penetration accident” in Xinjiang that

> the National Mine Safety Supervision Bureau has reported three recent coal mine accidents, including an April 10 “water penetration accident” in Xinjiang that caused 21 people to be trapped. > Significantly, the Xinjiang and Sichuan regions of China combined account for more than 50 percent of the overall Bitcoin mining hash rate This is horrific on so many levels, I’m not even sure where to begin. My heart goes out for those poor miners slaving away for... what?

vkou 5y ago
> My heart goes out for those poor miners slaving away for... what? A paycheck, typically.
throwaway9jb6 5y ago
Accidents happen everywhere including China. Shootings happen mostly in US
gruez 5y ago
>My heart goes out for those poor miners slaving away for... what? coal?
- bpodgursky 5y ago
  ... to appease Germany's environmentalists who saw shutting down working nuclear plants as a major win. (Yes, I know it's a different source of coal. But energy, in the age of oil tankers and thousand-mile pipelines, is fungible.)
  - bob29 5y ago
    No. Literally Germany's coal is specifically because its their own coal, a natural resource within their own borders they control. For national security, they maintain a coal capacity. Germany's coal burning is national security, nothing to do with environmentalists.
    - bpodgursky 5y ago
      Arguments about Germany's energy independence would be far more compelling if they were not, for example, currently building giant pipelines to import Russian natural gas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream
      - foepys 5y ago
        That's mostly for heating, though. Heat pumps are being increasingly used in new homes but nearly all homes older than 10 years are using gas or oil furnaces. Electricity prices are also very high, amongst the highest in the world, so heat pumps aren't as cheap to run as in other countries. It's definitely a problem that needs to be fixed, potentially within the next 30 years because that's the timeframe where the law requires old furnaces to be replaced.
        bpodgursky 5y ago
        But electricity would be cheaper... offsetting imported natural gas... if they left the nuclear power plants on.
    - saddlerustle 5y ago
      About a third of the coal burned in germany is imported
    - ulfw 5y ago
      National Security. Really?! So you use up a limited resource during peace times to have less of it during war times? Is that your logic?
      - thatguy0900 5y ago
        Well, you probably already want working staffed coal plants when the war starts.
        5y ago
  - derriz 5y ago
    What? This makes zero sense. Germany gets 24% of electricity from lignite/coal - down from 45% 6 or 7 years ago.
    - bpodgursky 5y ago
      This is a sloppy counterfactual, because that number could, and should, have been close to zero already! Yes, things are improving slowly. Yes, it is still crappy compared to the smart play.
      - graeme 5y ago
        I don’t know why you’re being downvoted. Coal and nuclear are fairly interchangeable. Since nuclear was shut down and some coal remains, it’s fairly clear Germany chose coal over nuclear for the medium term.
        derriz 5y ago
        I'm guessing because it's an impossible counterfactual to suggest that an advanced industrial country could fully replace/de-carbonize 70% of their electricity production in the time span under discussion. Suggesting impossible counterfactuals doesn't advance the discussion in any way. And Germany did not "chose coal over nuclear". While they have reduced nuclear production by about 30 TWh in the last 7 years, they have slashed coal-based electricity production by far more - 140 TWh - in the same period. And it's not like Germany is bucking some trend with respect to nuclear - nuclear has been in decline globally since its peak in the mid 1980s.
        graeme 5y ago
        Why is it impossible to run a counterfactual? They could have kept 100% of their nuclear and reduced their coal production by the same amount instead.
        derriz 5y ago
        Forgot to add to my reply - why is Germany being singled out? China burns 15 times as much coal as Germany - even the USA burns 3 times as much.
  - pizzapill 5y ago
    Germany is replacing nuclear/coal with wind/solar energy: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energiemix#/media/Datei:Energiemix_Deutschland.svg https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energiemix#/media/Datei:Energi... (grey = wind, red = nuclear, black/brown = coal) Both nuclear and coal are shrinking since ~ 2000 and both sources of energy have been replaced by renewables since then. Currently ~40% of power produced in Germany comes from renewables. Wind energy has become #1 source of power from 0 twenty years ago.
    - ekianjo 5y ago
      Nope Germany is massively relying on nuclear energy produced by its neighbors.
      - pizzapill 5y ago
        2002 was the last year Germany imported more power than it exported: https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/153533/umfrage/stromimportsaldo-von-deutschland-seit-1990/ https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/153533/umfrag...
        idownvoted 5y ago
        Ah Sweet, the old “exportweltmeister” scam never seems to get old. Germany is exporting so much energy because (and only because) without the base load provided by conventional power plants it’s energy grid routinely is on the brink of collapse, whenever there are weather based shifts in renewable energy production. This causes the electricity price to routinely go negative because our neighboring countries don’t want to have it either. What a failure. And what a failure that people still fall for that exportweltmeister lie
        pizzapill 5y ago
        Do you have a source for your claims? I mean its obvious that renewables are dependent on the weather, but that's no issue since a neighbour can always produce & Germany is building up power storage capacity. Including a fat line to Norway where Germany sends wind power and receives renewables power when there is a need. Additional the German power grid is super stable, black- or brownouts simply don't happen. > This causes the electricity price to routinely go negative because our neighboring countries don’t want to have it either. This has and probably will always happen. For example Aluminum smelters are getting paid to burn electricity almost since the beginning of the industrialization, otherwise this industry wouldn't exist. > What a failure. And what a failure that people still fall for that exportweltmeister lie So building up massive renewable capacity while starting to sell more and more of it is a failure to you? Either your expectations are crazy high or very low...
taneq 5y ago
> those poor miners slaving away for... what? Bitcoin, apparently.
- gruez 5y ago
  Where does it say bitcoin? The quote: >three recent coal mine accidents, [...] that caused 21 people to be trapped.
  - delecti 5y ago
    There are a few steps in between, but if the chain of events really is: coal mine accidents > coal shortage > power blackouts > drop in bitcoin mining, then the end result is effectively they were indeed slaving away for bitcoin.
    - gruez 5y ago
      I think you got cause and effect reversed. The correct chain of events is: coal miners slave away to produce coal, which is generally burned to produce heat. Part of that heat is used to run turbines to electric generators[1], and part of the generated electricity is used for bitcoin mining. Does this mean they're slaving away for bitcoin mining? I guess, but only partially. Saying they're slaving away for bitcoin mining is as correct as saying they're slaving away for steel smelting. [1] there are other uses, like for cooking or for heating a house
      - delecti 5y ago
        I suppose inherent in my argument that they're slaving away for bitcoin is how lowly I view bitcoin.
      - elefanten 5y ago
        Without the bitcoin driven demand, there would be less pressure to mine faster than feasible and fewer accidents. The pressure would still be there... but there are cost-related reasons the mining is colocated with the power generation. Seems a reasonable guess that this virtuous cycle of coal-and-crypto mining synergy resulted in some soylent externalities.

vkou 5y ago

> My heart goes out for those poor miners slaving away for... what? A paycheck, typically.

throwaway9jb6 5y ago

Accidents happen everywhere including China. Shootings happen mostly in US

gruez 5y ago

>My heart goes out for those poor miners slaving away for... what? coal?

bpodgursky 5y ago
... to appease Germany's environmentalists who saw shutting down working nuclear plants as a major win. (Yes, I know it's a different source of coal. But energy, in the age of oil tankers and thousand-mile pipelines, is fungible.)
- bob29 5y ago
  No. Literally Germany's coal is specifically because its their own coal, a natural resource within their own borders they control. For national security, they maintain a coal capacity. Germany's coal burning is national security, nothing to do with environmentalists.
  - bpodgursky 5y ago
    Arguments about Germany's energy independence would be far more compelling if they were not, for example, currently building giant pipelines to import Russian natural gas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream
    - foepys 5y ago
      That's mostly for heating, though. Heat pumps are being increasingly used in new homes but nearly all homes older than 10 years are using gas or oil furnaces. Electricity prices are also very high, amongst the highest in the world, so heat pumps aren't as cheap to run as in other countries. It's definitely a problem that needs to be fixed, potentially within the next 30 years because that's the timeframe where the law requires old furnaces to be replaced.
      - bpodgursky 5y ago
        But electricity would be cheaper... offsetting imported natural gas... if they left the nuclear power plants on.
  - saddlerustle 5y ago
    About a third of the coal burned in germany is imported
  - ulfw 5y ago
    National Security. Really?! So you use up a limited resource during peace times to have less of it during war times? Is that your logic?
    - thatguy0900 5y ago
      Well, you probably already want working staffed coal plants when the war starts.
      - 5y ago
- derriz 5y ago
  What? This makes zero sense. Germany gets 24% of electricity from lignite/coal - down from 45% 6 or 7 years ago.
  - bpodgursky 5y ago
    This is a sloppy counterfactual, because that number could, and should, have been close to zero already! Yes, things are improving slowly. Yes, it is still crappy compared to the smart play.
    - graeme 5y ago
      I don’t know why you’re being downvoted. Coal and nuclear are fairly interchangeable. Since nuclear was shut down and some coal remains, it’s fairly clear Germany chose coal over nuclear for the medium term.
      - derriz 5y ago
        I'm guessing because it's an impossible counterfactual to suggest that an advanced industrial country could fully replace/de-carbonize 70% of their electricity production in the time span under discussion. Suggesting impossible counterfactuals doesn't advance the discussion in any way. And Germany did not "chose coal over nuclear". While they have reduced nuclear production by about 30 TWh in the last 7 years, they have slashed coal-based electricity production by far more - 140 TWh - in the same period. And it's not like Germany is bucking some trend with respect to nuclear - nuclear has been in decline globally since its peak in the mid 1980s.
        graeme 5y ago
        Why is it impossible to run a counterfactual? They could have kept 100% of their nuclear and reduced their coal production by the same amount instead.
      - derriz 5y ago
        Forgot to add to my reply - why is Germany being singled out? China burns 15 times as much coal as Germany - even the USA burns 3 times as much.
- pizzapill 5y ago
  Germany is replacing nuclear/coal with wind/solar energy: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energiemix#/media/Datei:Energiemix_Deutschland.svg https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energiemix#/media/Datei:Energi... (grey = wind, red = nuclear, black/brown = coal) Both nuclear and coal are shrinking since ~ 2000 and both sources of energy have been replaced by renewables since then. Currently ~40% of power produced in Germany comes from renewables. Wind energy has become #1 source of power from 0 twenty years ago.
  - ekianjo 5y ago
    Nope Germany is massively relying on nuclear energy produced by its neighbors.
    - pizzapill 5y ago
      2002 was the last year Germany imported more power than it exported: https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/153533/umfrage/stromimportsaldo-von-deutschland-seit-1990/ https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/153533/umfrag...
      - idownvoted 5y ago
        Ah Sweet, the old “exportweltmeister” scam never seems to get old. Germany is exporting so much energy because (and only because) without the base load provided by conventional power plants it’s energy grid routinely is on the brink of collapse, whenever there are weather based shifts in renewable energy production. This causes the electricity price to routinely go negative because our neighboring countries don’t want to have it either. What a failure. And what a failure that people still fall for that exportweltmeister lie
        pizzapill 5y ago
        Do you have a source for your claims? I mean its obvious that renewables are dependent on the weather, but that's no issue since a neighbour can always produce & Germany is building up power storage capacity. Including a fat line to Norway where Germany sends wind power and receives renewables power when there is a need. Additional the German power grid is super stable, black- or brownouts simply don't happen. > This causes the electricity price to routinely go negative because our neighboring countries don’t want to have it either. This has and probably will always happen. For example Aluminum smelters are getting paid to burn electricity almost since the beginning of the industrialization, otherwise this industry wouldn't exist. > What a failure. And what a failure that people still fall for that exportweltmeister lie So building up massive renewable capacity while starting to sell more and more of it is a failure to you? Either your expectations are crazy high or very low...

taneq 5y ago

> those poor miners slaving away for... what? Bitcoin, apparently.

gruez 5y ago
Where does it say bitcoin? The quote: >three recent coal mine accidents, [...] that caused 21 people to be trapped.
- delecti 5y ago
  There are a few steps in between, but if the chain of events really is: coal mine accidents > coal shortage > power blackouts > drop in bitcoin mining, then the end result is effectively they were indeed slaving away for bitcoin.
  - gruez 5y ago
    I think you got cause and effect reversed. The correct chain of events is: coal miners slave away to produce coal, which is generally burned to produce heat. Part of that heat is used to run turbines to electric generators[1], and part of the generated electricity is used for bitcoin mining. Does this mean they're slaving away for bitcoin mining? I guess, but only partially. Saying they're slaving away for bitcoin mining is as correct as saying they're slaving away for steel smelting. [1] there are other uses, like for cooking or for heating a house
    - delecti 5y ago
      I suppose inherent in my argument that they're slaving away for bitcoin is how lowly I view bitcoin.
    - elefanten 5y ago
      Without the bitcoin driven demand, there would be less pressure to mine faster than feasible and fewer accidents. The pressure would still be there... but there are cost-related reasons the mining is colocated with the power generation. Seems a reasonable guess that this virtuous cycle of coal-and-crypto mining synergy resulted in some soylent externalities.