5 ms·

More like, it adds another use for solar energy surplus besides storing in a battery or selling back to the grid. https://wintonark.medium.com/bitcoin-mining

More like, it adds another use for solar energy surplus besides storing in a battery or selling back to the grid. https://wintonark.medium.com/bitcoin-mining-impact-on-renewable-uptake-fc91c5aa9be0 https://wintonark.medium.com/bitcoin-mining-impact-on-renewa... https://github.com/ARKInvest/SolarBatteryBitcoin https://github.com/ARKInvest/SolarBatteryBitcoin

danans 5y ago
If the problem supposedly being addressed is surplus renewable supply, a far better and more broadly relevant use would be heating domestic hot water, which would simultaneously displace natural gas usage for that purpose. About 15% of US household natural gas usage is for domestic hot water heating. That adds up to a lot of CO2. https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=37433 https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=37433 Edit: corrected percentage and added reference.
- sudosysgen 5y ago
  I've always thought municipal hot water systems are a good idea. Maybe warming water in buffer tanks to supply to homes for hot water and heating writ large a few hours or days later is a feasible buffer?
  - danans 5y ago
    Municipal hot water systems would suffer from significant heat losses in the piping between the heating plant and the houses, not to mention the huge infrastructure expense of running an extra set of hot water lines throughout a municipality. What I was describing is more along the lines of dispatchable electric heat pump water heaters in houses. These type of water heaters are already available today, and we should be replacing every natural gas water heater with them.
    - sudosysgen 5y ago
      I would totally be a huge infrastrucre cost. That said many water systems are due for overhauls in the coming years anyways. However, heat loss is not a significant issue. These systems were installed in Scandinavian countries as well as in a lot of the Soviet Union, with heat losses of 9% and less achievable. This compares favorably with ~5% power losses in the grid. Water stores heat very very well. The main advantage is that while yes it is a bit less efficient for waste electricity, it allows nuclear power plants, data centers, and other waste heat-producing industries to recuperate 80+% of heat losses, and crucially when heating is a big cost, thermal solar is about 3x more effective than photovoltaic. This system would make it possible for 100% of heating carbon emissions to be eliminated, all the time, while at the same times allowing for buffer tanks to soak up excess electricity supply.
Dylan16807 5y ago
That's a really large fraction of money going to the mining hardware, despite the model already using high electricity prices. That makes me worry the economics wouldn't be stable enough.

danans 5y ago

If the problem supposedly being addressed is surplus renewable supply, a far better and more broadly relevant use would be heating domestic hot water, which would simultaneously displace natural gas usage for that purpose. About 15% of US household natural gas usage is for domestic hot water heating. That adds up to a lot of CO2. https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=37433 https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=37433 Edit: corrected percentage and added reference.

sudosysgen 5y ago
I've always thought municipal hot water systems are a good idea. Maybe warming water in buffer tanks to supply to homes for hot water and heating writ large a few hours or days later is a feasible buffer?
- danans 5y ago
  Municipal hot water systems would suffer from significant heat losses in the piping between the heating plant and the houses, not to mention the huge infrastructure expense of running an extra set of hot water lines throughout a municipality. What I was describing is more along the lines of dispatchable electric heat pump water heaters in houses. These type of water heaters are already available today, and we should be replacing every natural gas water heater with them.
  - sudosysgen 5y ago
    I would totally be a huge infrastrucre cost. That said many water systems are due for overhauls in the coming years anyways. However, heat loss is not a significant issue. These systems were installed in Scandinavian countries as well as in a lot of the Soviet Union, with heat losses of 9% and less achievable. This compares favorably with ~5% power losses in the grid. Water stores heat very very well. The main advantage is that while yes it is a bit less efficient for waste electricity, it allows nuclear power plants, data centers, and other waste heat-producing industries to recuperate 80+% of heat losses, and crucially when heating is a big cost, thermal solar is about 3x more effective than photovoltaic. This system would make it possible for 100% of heating carbon emissions to be eliminated, all the time, while at the same times allowing for buffer tanks to soak up excess electricity supply.

Dylan16807 5y ago

That's a really large fraction of money going to the mining hardware, despite the model already using high electricity prices. That makes me worry the economics wouldn't be stable enough.