6 ms·

...except that people are bringing new carbon-emitting power plants online to power their mining rigs. Really though, this argument is utter nonsense. Solar/w

...except that people are bringing new carbon-emitting power plants online to power their mining rigs. Really though, this argument is utter nonsense. Solar/wind/etc. power being dumped into Bitcoin mining means carbon-emitting power is being used elsewhere instead of being shut down. Bitcoin is an environmental disaster that consumes massive amounts of energy just to process a tiny number of transactions.

fallenspec 5y ago
Have you thought though that if more money goes into Solar, Wind/etc (via BTC, Eth mining and similar) that more money goes into renewable energy and thus more money can be spent by those companies improving their existing offerings or researching new tech? A lot of the time Early adopters end up essentially funding technology that would have investment otherwise.
- betterunix2 5y ago
  With Bitcoin mining, that money comes with the massive carbon emissions driven by the huge energy demand. The alternative, governments subsidizing solar/wind/etc. deployments, comes without the massive energy demand and lets grid operators shut down their carbon-emitting plants. Like I said, the fact that people are bringing carbon-emitting power plants online to power Bitcoin rigs speaks volumes about this line of thinking.
  - fallenspec 5y ago
    The problem is with many with your attitude is that everything must be done perfectly now. This is the attitude of an abolitionist. It isn't perfect therefore it must be banned. There is money to be made mining Bitcoin and people will mine it (illegally if need be). It is better that if this funds renewables (they claim to be paying for offsets according to the clip and investing in Solar) now even if it isn't perfect (The plant itself seems to be better than the Coal powered plants in China).
- SantalBlush 5y ago
  This is a broken windows fallacy that is often repeated on reddit and HN. It makes about as much sense as all of us buying solar panels and leaving our refrigerators open all day.
  - fallenspec 5y ago
    I didn't know what the broken window fallacy was. So I looked it up. It is rather dubious if what I said fits into this fallacy. If I leave my refrigerator open all day, it is guaranteed it will produce nothing of value. In this case, it is more dubious. They are producing a good that people want to buy. You might think Bitcoin is worthless, but that is besides the point, other people think it is worth it. Since the benefit vs the energy usage is completely subjective it isn't as clear cut as you like to make out. My point was that people spending time doing things that seem pointless at the time can sometimes benefit everyone in the future in unexpected way. You, nor I can know what the future holds.
    - SantalBlush 5y ago
      >If I leave my refrigerator open all day, it is guaranteed it will produce nothing of value. This isn't true. I can put the back of my refrigerator in my doorway and use it to cool my house. "Leaving my refrigerator open all day isn't wasteful, because it cools my house and I use green energy to do it." This is essentially the logic used in this thread; it is a complete non sequitur. I suppose one could say that whether or not it's wasteful to cool my home with my refrigerator is subjective, but most would say that's just being obtuse.
latchkey 5y ago
One neat thing about bitcoin is that we can estimate transactions and related energy usage. Try that with global finance. updated: for clarity.
- anonporridge 5y ago
  That's not completely true. Off chain transactions, whether thinks like lightning network or centralized exchanges, make it very difficult to actually know how much value transfer is happening. As the network scales up, these kinds of transactions will increasingly make up a greater percentage of all value transfer, while easily measurable base chain settlement transactions will be a minority.
  - latchkey 5y ago
    You're right, for the same reason that articles like the op's aren't entirely accurate either. Nothing is perfect, however it is easy to consider that global finance is orders of magnitude more wasteful than bitcoin. Just imagine all the bank tellers (transaction validators) driving to work each day. It is always interesting to me how other PoW chains are completely ignored in the general hatred. ETH mining is a massive consumer of electricity, but since that is supposed to be ending some day, nobody seems to care. The end solution might eventually be to tokenize all btc, on top of eth.
    - anonporridge 5y ago
      > Just imagine all the bank tellers (transaction validators) driving to work each day. Don't forget the Proof of Violence that secures the fiat monetary system. The US military is the largest institutional consumer of oil on the planet. > It is always interesting to me how other PoW chains are completely ignored in the general hatred. And simultaneously, bitcoin still gets blamed for GPU prices, even though that's Ethereum and other alts. > The end solution might eventually be to tokenize all btc, on top of eth. Highly unlikely. There are good arguments for why PoS will never fully replace PoW. I think it's more likely that all the altcoin use cases get rebased as second layers anchored into bitcoin's PoW.
wyager 5y ago
That’s not how power grids work. It’s only economically viable to build many forms of green energy if you have a constant baseline consumer, so you rarely or never have to turn off the power plant, and you don’t waste money if you over-allocate enough to meet demand during low production periods (like for wind). Bitcoin is unique in that it provides a constant demand at a particular price.

fallenspec 5y ago

Have you thought though that if more money goes into Solar, Wind/etc (via BTC, Eth mining and similar) that more money goes into renewable energy and thus more money can be spent by those companies improving their existing offerings or researching new tech? A lot of the time Early adopters end up essentially funding technology that would have investment otherwise.

betterunix2 5y ago
With Bitcoin mining, that money comes with the massive carbon emissions driven by the huge energy demand. The alternative, governments subsidizing solar/wind/etc. deployments, comes without the massive energy demand and lets grid operators shut down their carbon-emitting plants. Like I said, the fact that people are bringing carbon-emitting power plants online to power Bitcoin rigs speaks volumes about this line of thinking.
- fallenspec 5y ago
  The problem is with many with your attitude is that everything must be done perfectly now. This is the attitude of an abolitionist. It isn't perfect therefore it must be banned. There is money to be made mining Bitcoin and people will mine it (illegally if need be). It is better that if this funds renewables (they claim to be paying for offsets according to the clip and investing in Solar) now even if it isn't perfect (The plant itself seems to be better than the Coal powered plants in China).
SantalBlush 5y ago
This is a broken windows fallacy that is often repeated on reddit and HN. It makes about as much sense as all of us buying solar panels and leaving our refrigerators open all day.
- fallenspec 5y ago
  I didn't know what the broken window fallacy was. So I looked it up. It is rather dubious if what I said fits into this fallacy. If I leave my refrigerator open all day, it is guaranteed it will produce nothing of value. In this case, it is more dubious. They are producing a good that people want to buy. You might think Bitcoin is worthless, but that is besides the point, other people think it is worth it. Since the benefit vs the energy usage is completely subjective it isn't as clear cut as you like to make out. My point was that people spending time doing things that seem pointless at the time can sometimes benefit everyone in the future in unexpected way. You, nor I can know what the future holds.
  - SantalBlush 5y ago
    >If I leave my refrigerator open all day, it is guaranteed it will produce nothing of value. This isn't true. I can put the back of my refrigerator in my doorway and use it to cool my house. "Leaving my refrigerator open all day isn't wasteful, because it cools my house and I use green energy to do it." This is essentially the logic used in this thread; it is a complete non sequitur. I suppose one could say that whether or not it's wasteful to cool my home with my refrigerator is subjective, but most would say that's just being obtuse.

latchkey 5y ago

One neat thing about bitcoin is that we can estimate transactions and related energy usage. Try that with global finance. updated: for clarity.

anonporridge 5y ago
That's not completely true. Off chain transactions, whether thinks like lightning network or centralized exchanges, make it very difficult to actually know how much value transfer is happening. As the network scales up, these kinds of transactions will increasingly make up a greater percentage of all value transfer, while easily measurable base chain settlement transactions will be a minority.
- latchkey 5y ago
  You're right, for the same reason that articles like the op's aren't entirely accurate either. Nothing is perfect, however it is easy to consider that global finance is orders of magnitude more wasteful than bitcoin. Just imagine all the bank tellers (transaction validators) driving to work each day. It is always interesting to me how other PoW chains are completely ignored in the general hatred. ETH mining is a massive consumer of electricity, but since that is supposed to be ending some day, nobody seems to care. The end solution might eventually be to tokenize all btc, on top of eth.
  - anonporridge 5y ago
    > Just imagine all the bank tellers (transaction validators) driving to work each day. Don't forget the Proof of Violence that secures the fiat monetary system. The US military is the largest institutional consumer of oil on the planet. > It is always interesting to me how other PoW chains are completely ignored in the general hatred. And simultaneously, bitcoin still gets blamed for GPU prices, even though that's Ethereum and other alts. > The end solution might eventually be to tokenize all btc, on top of eth. Highly unlikely. There are good arguments for why PoS will never fully replace PoW. I think it's more likely that all the altcoin use cases get rebased as second layers anchored into bitcoin's PoW.

wyager 5y ago

That’s not how power grids work. It’s only economically viable to build many forms of green energy if you have a constant baseline consumer, so you rarely or never have to turn off the power plant, and you don’t waste money if you over-allocate enough to meet demand during low production periods (like for wind). Bitcoin is unique in that it provides a constant demand at a particular price.