5 ms·

Re the carbon footprint argument with Bitcoin: I’m curious how the energy use of just a top 5 retail bank compares to Bitcoin. Chase [0], for instance, has ov

by adwi 5y ago

Re the carbon footprint argument with Bitcoin: I’m curious how the energy use of just a top 5 retail bank compares to Bitcoin. Chase [0], for instance, has over 5,000 retail locations and 16,000 ATMs. And the servers, and call centers/corporate offices to support 200,000 employees. And the cars they drive back and forth to those offices, and the construction of new ones, and flights (some private), etc etc. How much energy does that use—let alone the physical resources and their attendant carbon and energy use? Then you have another 4,500 branches from Bank of America, 7200 for Wells, etc. And that’s just the US. Not equivocating, nor arguing that Bitcoin could replace all their functions, but I think there might be more nuance to the energy argument, especially when at least other crypto currencies have an off ramp with their energy use via proof of stake. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chase_Bank https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chase_Bank

dijit 5y ago
This equivocation has been investigated quite succinctly: http://climatestate.com/2018/01/15/energy-consumption-bitcoin-vs-banking-system/#:~:text=For%20small%20bank%20ATM%20machines,100%20terawatt%20hours%20a%20year http://climatestate.com/2018/01/15/energy-consumption-bitcoi....
- afiori 5y ago
  > [all the banks in the world have] a total [consumption] of close to a 100 terawatt hours a year. > The highest estimates for Bitcoins annual terawatt hours consumption is 28.67. This means, more than 3 times more efficient than a very conservative calculation of the cost of the global banking system. I think that a "transaction count" and/or "services provided" are missing from the calculation. ultimately it does nothing to answer the only relevant question: if the entire banking/financial system switched to bitcoins/crypto would consumption increase or decrease? I personally think it would be very hard to argue the case of a decrease
tehsauce 5y ago
It’s not even close. Banks provide so many services. your bank could be using a cryptocurrency as their backend, and you wouldn’t even know. the technology has almost zero impact to the user experience or efficiency. sorry

by adwi 5y ago

dijit 5y ago

This equivocation has been investigated quite succinctly: http://climatestate.com/2018/01/15/energy-consumption-bitcoin-vs-banking-system/#:~:text=For%20small%20bank%20ATM%20machines,100%20terawatt%20hours%20a%20year http://climatestate.com/2018/01/15/energy-consumption-bitcoi....

afiori 5y ago
> [all the banks in the world have] a total [consumption] of close to a 100 terawatt hours a year. > The highest estimates for Bitcoins annual terawatt hours consumption is 28.67. This means, more than 3 times more efficient than a very conservative calculation of the cost of the global banking system. I think that a "transaction count" and/or "services provided" are missing from the calculation. ultimately it does nothing to answer the only relevant question: if the entire banking/financial system switched to bitcoins/crypto would consumption increase or decrease? I personally think it would be very hard to argue the case of a decrease

tehsauce 5y ago

It’s not even close. Banks provide so many services. your bank could be using a cryptocurrency as their backend, and you wouldn’t even know. the technology has almost zero impact to the user experience or efficiency. sorry