4 ms·

> Energy use is not energy source I’ll go a step further - Bitcoin’s energy use is centralized around the cheapest sources due to economic forces. If renewable

> Energy use is not energy source I’ll go a step further - Bitcoin’s energy use is centralized around the cheapest sources due to economic forces. If renewables are cheaper at scale than fossil fuels, Bitcoin’s energy use could in fact become a net positive for the world. To put it another way, the profitability of mining is directly proportional to the cost of electricity compared to the global average. This should drive the development of less expensive forms of energy over time. Even if fossil fuels are cheapest today (and I’m not certain that’s true), there is an ongoing cost floor due to it relying upon extraction, processing, transportation, and burning. Solar, for example, has a higher capital cost but presumably a lower ongoing $/kWh. Finally, ~5% (2.2-13.3%) of electricity generated in the US is lost due to transmission from the point of generation to the point of consumption. India loses 20-30%. [0] Bitcoin mining, given its high power consumption, should specifically drive decentralized power generation. This in turn could help make such technology available for other uses, resulting in a less centralized, more robust power grid. 0: http://insideenergy.org/2015/11/06/lost-in-transmission-how-much-electricity-disappears-between-a-power-plant-and-your-plug/ http://insideenergy.org/2015/11/06/lost-in-transmission-how-... 1: https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=23452 https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=23452

X6S1x6Okd1st 5y ago
Using renewables to do something that doesn't need to be done is not a win. I divested from all PoW coins except ETH in expectation that PoS will be completed soon.
- Ancapistani 5y ago
  > Using renewables to do something that doesn't need to be done is not a win. It is if it spurs development of the underlying tech. Pornography isn’t necessary, but because it was consumed in volume we ended up with ubiquitous household VCRs in the 80s and 90s.
  - lottin 5y ago
    > It is if it spurs development of the underlying tech. How does that work? For example, if leave a lightbulb on all day long, does that spur adoption or development of renewable energy sources?
  - X6S1x6Okd1st 5y ago
    And breaking windows spurs the local economy because people will pay to get them fixed.
    - Ancapistani 5y ago
      You’re confusing economic activity with technological progress. Breaking a window isn’t going to be a net positive. If everyone breaks a window and replaces it, every week, at some point it’s highly likely that a more efficient process for window replacement will be developed.
      - X6S1x6Okd1st 5y ago
        I've never heard the rejoiner to the broken window fallacy that they just aren't breaking enough windows lol.
        Ancapistani 5y ago
        That is the fallacy, lol. Again, though - we’re not talking about increasing the overall economic output. We’re talking about spending resources to incentivize technological progress. I’m also not saying it’s a good idea to start doing it because it’ll surely work. I’m only saying that it may well end up having positive effects outside of the primary use case.
lottin 5y ago
Absolute rubbish. You talk like there's something magical about Bitcoin, when in fact every profit-maximising firm will always use the cheapest energy available. Seriously what kind of pathetic argument is this, or am I missing something?
- cwkoss 5y ago
  You're missing that economic theory doesn't align with the practical realities: it's expensive and wasteful to move most energy consumption around, you can't easily move an aluminum foundry or a city to the other side of the world to rapidly respond to market discrepancies.
  - lottin 5y ago
    Yes, and I assume bitcoin magically fixes this somehow?
    - cwkoss 5y ago
      I'm just pointing out your statement "every profit-maximising firm will always use the cheapest energy available" is not true or practically feasible. Bitcoin miners can respond to energy price in minutes, where most industry is hours, sometimes days (for capacity that already exists - months to years for capacity that does not). Stop/start costs are very low, so its easy to run only in profitable energy conditions.
      - lottin 5y ago
        A Bitcoin miner cannot relocate to a different part of the country where electricity costs are momentarily cheaper in a matter of minutes. And they are not gonna buy a whole lot of computing equipment and then let it idle for long periods of time because of fluctuations in the price of electricity. None of this makes any sense.

X6S1x6Okd1st 5y ago

Using renewables to do something that doesn't need to be done is not a win. I divested from all PoW coins except ETH in expectation that PoS will be completed soon.

Ancapistani 5y ago
> Using renewables to do something that doesn't need to be done is not a win. It is if it spurs development of the underlying tech. Pornography isn’t necessary, but because it was consumed in volume we ended up with ubiquitous household VCRs in the 80s and 90s.
- lottin 5y ago
  > It is if it spurs development of the underlying tech. How does that work? For example, if leave a lightbulb on all day long, does that spur adoption or development of renewable energy sources?
- X6S1x6Okd1st 5y ago
  And breaking windows spurs the local economy because people will pay to get them fixed.
  - Ancapistani 5y ago
    You’re confusing economic activity with technological progress. Breaking a window isn’t going to be a net positive. If everyone breaks a window and replaces it, every week, at some point it’s highly likely that a more efficient process for window replacement will be developed.
    - X6S1x6Okd1st 5y ago
      I've never heard the rejoiner to the broken window fallacy that they just aren't breaking enough windows lol.
      - Ancapistani 5y ago
        That is the fallacy, lol. Again, though - we’re not talking about increasing the overall economic output. We’re talking about spending resources to incentivize technological progress. I’m also not saying it’s a good idea to start doing it because it’ll surely work. I’m only saying that it may well end up having positive effects outside of the primary use case.

lottin 5y ago

Absolute rubbish. You talk like there's something magical about Bitcoin, when in fact every profit-maximising firm will always use the cheapest energy available. Seriously what kind of pathetic argument is this, or am I missing something?

cwkoss 5y ago
You're missing that economic theory doesn't align with the practical realities: it's expensive and wasteful to move most energy consumption around, you can't easily move an aluminum foundry or a city to the other side of the world to rapidly respond to market discrepancies.
- lottin 5y ago
  Yes, and I assume bitcoin magically fixes this somehow?
  - cwkoss 5y ago
    I'm just pointing out your statement "every profit-maximising firm will always use the cheapest energy available" is not true or practically feasible. Bitcoin miners can respond to energy price in minutes, where most industry is hours, sometimes days (for capacity that already exists - months to years for capacity that does not). Stop/start costs are very low, so its easy to run only in profitable energy conditions.
    - lottin 5y ago
      A Bitcoin miner cannot relocate to a different part of the country where electricity costs are momentarily cheaper in a matter of minutes. And they are not gonna buy a whole lot of computing equipment and then let it idle for long periods of time because of fluctuations in the price of electricity. None of this makes any sense.