3 ms·

> The environmental harm of a single ethereum transaction is very low. Lower than a fundraising dinner. Please take your nitpicking elsewhere. Source? I'm curi

> The environmental harm of a single ethereum transaction is very low. Lower than a fundraising dinner. Please take your nitpicking elsewhere. Source? I'm curious to see exactly how the environmental harm of a fundraising dinner is quantified. edit: When I google "ethereum transaction energy cost" the Google featured snippet says 50kwH for a single transaction. I find it hard to believe that it would take 50kWH to cook a single dinner. If you're referring to multiple dinners, then you would have to subtract the cost to eat in general as eating is a human necessity - hence me asking your source since I'm genuinely curious.

sp332 6y ago
With the NFT minting, several bids, sale, and transfer of ownership, it's an average of 340 kWh for a successful NFT, according to https://memoakten.medium.com/the-unreasonable-ecological-cost-of-cryptoart-2221d3eb2053 https://memoakten.medium.com/the-unreasonable-ecological-cos... which has sources and methodology etc. That seems pretty high even for a fundraising dinner, and at least that includes food.
eloff 6y ago
Think about all the energy costs involved in everyone driving to the dinner, the air conditioning or heating for the venue, etc. It would depend on the number of guests which is more costly to the environment. For a dinner where you aim to raise 2.5 million, I think the dinner is going to have a bigger impact. But again, I want to reiterate that focusing on the environmental impact here is totally missing the point. It's like saying the outside of the hospital is painted a jarring color.
- endisneigh 6y ago
  this is a really disingenuous comparison. again you'd have to subtract the costs that would've already been incurred anyway. would someone invited to a fundraiser dinner not eat otherwise? or drive? or have AC? also, given that it's already very easy to send money to any non-profit talking about the potentially unnecessary environment costs doesn't seem unreasonable. the only reason people bring it up is because there's an alternative that doesn't incur the same costs but achieve the same thing.
  - eloff 6y ago
    > this is a really disingenuous comparison. Neither of us put up numbers, but I didn't call you disingenuous. I stand by what I said until I see math to the contrary.
    - endisneigh 6y ago
      You're the one who made the claim to begin with - so there's nothing to stand on, it's just a baseless claim since you didn't really provide any information on how much energy is required for a "fundraiser dinner" to begin with that wouldn't have been used anyway.
      - eloff 6y ago
        And you followed with a baseless rebuttal. Don't waste your breath.

sp332 6y ago

With the NFT minting, several bids, sale, and transfer of ownership, it's an average of 340 kWh for a successful NFT, according to https://memoakten.medium.com/the-unreasonable-ecological-cost-of-cryptoart-2221d3eb2053 https://memoakten.medium.com/the-unreasonable-ecological-cos... which has sources and methodology etc. That seems pretty high even for a fundraising dinner, and at least that includes food.

eloff 6y ago

Think about all the energy costs involved in everyone driving to the dinner, the air conditioning or heating for the venue, etc. It would depend on the number of guests which is more costly to the environment. For a dinner where you aim to raise 2.5 million, I think the dinner is going to have a bigger impact. But again, I want to reiterate that focusing on the environmental impact here is totally missing the point. It's like saying the outside of the hospital is painted a jarring color.

endisneigh 6y ago
this is a really disingenuous comparison. again you'd have to subtract the costs that would've already been incurred anyway. would someone invited to a fundraiser dinner not eat otherwise? or drive? or have AC? also, given that it's already very easy to send money to any non-profit talking about the potentially unnecessary environment costs doesn't seem unreasonable. the only reason people bring it up is because there's an alternative that doesn't incur the same costs but achieve the same thing.
- eloff 6y ago
  > this is a really disingenuous comparison. Neither of us put up numbers, but I didn't call you disingenuous. I stand by what I said until I see math to the contrary.
  - endisneigh 6y ago
    You're the one who made the claim to begin with - so there's nothing to stand on, it's just a baseless claim since you didn't really provide any information on how much energy is required for a "fundraiser dinner" to begin with that wouldn't have been used anyway.
    - eloff 6y ago
      And you followed with a baseless rebuttal. Don't waste your breath.