4 ms·

This articles makes absolutely no sense. It uses market capitalisation of Apple and bitcoin to compare the CO2 emissions of an iPhone and a bitcoin transaction

This articles makes absolutely no sense. It uses market capitalisation of Apple and bitcoin to compare the CO2 emissions of an iPhone and a bitcoin transaction which is clearly nonsense. You could calculate the rough CO2 emissions of a 1 BTC transaction by dividing annual estimated CO2 emissions by bitcoin miners (35 million tonnes) by the number of annual transactions (100 million) which equates to about 350kg of CO2. An iPhone on the other hand produces around 100kg of CO2 to manufacture according to https://www.compareandrecycle.co.uk/blog/iphone-lifecycle-what-is-the-carbon-footprint-of-an-iphone https://www.compareandrecycle.co.uk/blog/iphone-lifecycle-wh... So in summary it's actually only 3 to 4 times.

laurent92 5y ago
Also, 1 BTC is about 30 iPhones in money. It’s as interesting as saying a holiday consumes more than a bus trip: only CO2 / dollar is interesting. Or equivalent-CO2 “per service provided”. Because, with all the remaining dollars, you’re not going to destroy them, you’re going to consume other services/products, and if they are heavier in CO2 emissions per dollars in average, we’re not in a better position.
- ralfd 5y ago
  An iPhone is a physical thing. All kinds of different metals were mined/recycled and manufactured and shipped around the world. A bitcoin transaction is virtual. Some bits have to be flipped. That it is such an energy intensive and environmentally bad clusterfuck is a tragedy.
  - rawtxapp 5y ago
    A bit has to be flipped in a system where no one trusts (or has to trust) each other, that's why it uses energy.
  - laurent92 5y ago
    You don’t know, it may provide a service which is so intense that it’s worth it. The only way to know is to sell it. (If flipping bits weren’t so important, no-one would pay for datacenters).
ChuckMcM 5y ago
And in US$/kg Bitcoin is a real deal. At $50,000 that is about $143/kg of CO2 and an iPhone @ $1000 is less than $10/kg of CO2. :-) I completely agree that using arbitrary numerology to cast shade on a technology you would rather not exist is not very good reasoning, but some folks respond to it so it persists.
incrudible 5y ago
> You could calculate the rough CO2 emissions of a 1 BTC transaction by dividing annual estimated CO2 emissions by bitcoin miners (35 million tonnes) by the number of annual transactions (100 million) which equates to about 350kg of CO2. Even that would be misleading, because the number of transactions is a constant that has little bearing on the amount of work performed. Most of the revenue still comes from block reward, which disappears over time. Transactions fees would not support current levels of work. If anything the cost of creating a Bitcoin has a carbon footprint, but most Bitcoins haven't been created at current prices and difficulty levels. Given that creation of a Bitcoin is historically unique event that is certain to cease, it's not really worth losing sleep over in terms of CO2 emissions.
ajkdhcb2 5y ago
Your calculation is invalid too. Mining energy is not just used to process a transaction. Miners really do it to generate more BTC. It is the energy of the whole network. You're not including all related activities like the energy used in Apples banking and advertising, flying their employees around etc Less BTC is generated over time, eventually none at all. The energy usage has no relation to actually performing a transaction. All of the 'BTC energy usage' calculations that talk about future climate change estimations and come up with 'per transaction' values are completely invalid.

laurent92 5y ago

Also, 1 BTC is about 30 iPhones in money. It’s as interesting as saying a holiday consumes more than a bus trip: only CO2 / dollar is interesting. Or equivalent-CO2 “per service provided”. Because, with all the remaining dollars, you’re not going to destroy them, you’re going to consume other services/products, and if they are heavier in CO2 emissions per dollars in average, we’re not in a better position.

ralfd 5y ago
An iPhone is a physical thing. All kinds of different metals were mined/recycled and manufactured and shipped around the world. A bitcoin transaction is virtual. Some bits have to be flipped. That it is such an energy intensive and environmentally bad clusterfuck is a tragedy.
- rawtxapp 5y ago
  A bit has to be flipped in a system where no one trusts (or has to trust) each other, that's why it uses energy.
- laurent92 5y ago
  You don’t know, it may provide a service which is so intense that it’s worth it. The only way to know is to sell it. (If flipping bits weren’t so important, no-one would pay for datacenters).

ChuckMcM 5y ago

And in US$/kg Bitcoin is a real deal. At $50,000 that is about $143/kg of CO2 and an iPhone @ $1000 is less than $10/kg of CO2. :-) I completely agree that using arbitrary numerology to cast shade on a technology you would rather not exist is not very good reasoning, but some folks respond to it so it persists.

incrudible 5y ago

> You could calculate the rough CO2 emissions of a 1 BTC transaction by dividing annual estimated CO2 emissions by bitcoin miners (35 million tonnes) by the number of annual transactions (100 million) which equates to about 350kg of CO2. Even that would be misleading, because the number of transactions is a constant that has little bearing on the amount of work performed. Most of the revenue still comes from block reward, which disappears over time. Transactions fees would not support current levels of work. If anything the cost of creating a Bitcoin has a carbon footprint, but most Bitcoins haven't been created at current prices and difficulty levels. Given that creation of a Bitcoin is historically unique event that is certain to cease, it's not really worth losing sleep over in terms of CO2 emissions.

ajkdhcb2 5y ago

Your calculation is invalid too. Mining energy is not just used to process a transaction. Miners really do it to generate more BTC. It is the energy of the whole network. You're not including all related activities like the energy used in Apples banking and advertising, flying their employees around etc Less BTC is generated over time, eventually none at all. The energy usage has no relation to actually performing a transaction. All of the 'BTC energy usage' calculations that talk about future climate change estimations and come up with 'per transaction' values are completely invalid.