3 ms·

The energy usage is FUD. Bitcoin uses less energy than Christmas Lights, clothes dryers, or the gold industry. And it uses ~1/10th what video gaming does. And i

The energy usage is FUD. Bitcoin uses less energy than Christmas Lights, clothes dryers, or the gold industry. And it uses ~1/10th what video gaming does. And it's energy mix is cleaner than those uses because a lot of it comes from flared gas and stranded hydro.

vmception 5y ago
This is correct, people don't want to hear it because the energy use argument was just a convenient trend for them to latch on their already existing “useless crypto” arguments that just lacked a hook. People want to say that there must be some Other use of the energy and aren't aware of how much energy has just been wasted and strewn directly into the atmosphere for decades, with crypto mining onsite being the only economic use so far. The miners also did themselves a disservice by trying to keep their energy sources secret for several years, I know some of them in North America intentionally helped spread the energy misinformation just to slow others down from getting capital to build out their own sites. But honestly all of this doesn't really matter as the oil and gas producers with the sites are the slowest ones to adopt. The ones already polluting for a century who are desperate for a solution are just slow to collaborate with the solution providers, the miners. They aren't stuck on carbon emissions as they have already made that their identity, they get that mining onsite reduces their carbon emissions even though other people ironically arent willing to understand that, the people running sites are just technophobes and computing luddites who dont get crypto, with a slight general concern about safety with adding more stuff to a dangerous site.
martin_a 5y ago
BS. If all that mining capacity is sitting in Kazakhstan they will most probably not import energy from renewables in Norway or sth. like that. Their energy mix is/was 99% fossils in 2019 [0], they can't change it that quick. [0] https://www.iea.org/countries/Kazakhstan https://www.iea.org/countries/Kazakhstan
- vmception 5y ago
  Its an energy mix. One country isn’t the whole network. Any country that subsidized electricity distorts the whole market there. The best approach to this consternation about mining energy use is vigilance in ensuring miners use captured and renewable energy. If there are subsidies or if governments get directly involved in trying to control the network that’s when it distorts the market forces. It’s sad that this discussion is currently limited to simply not being willing to accept that captured energy has always existed and is being utilized by miners as a significant energy source on the network. Energy that would only have been used to pollute the atmosphere but now is not.

vmception 5y ago

This is correct, people don't want to hear it because the energy use argument was just a convenient trend for them to latch on their already existing “useless crypto” arguments that just lacked a hook. People want to say that there must be some Other use of the energy and aren't aware of how much energy has just been wasted and strewn directly into the atmosphere for decades, with crypto mining onsite being the only economic use so far. The miners also did themselves a disservice by trying to keep their energy sources secret for several years, I know some of them in North America intentionally helped spread the energy misinformation just to slow others down from getting capital to build out their own sites. But honestly all of this doesn't really matter as the oil and gas producers with the sites are the slowest ones to adopt. The ones already polluting for a century who are desperate for a solution are just slow to collaborate with the solution providers, the miners. They aren't stuck on carbon emissions as they have already made that their identity, they get that mining onsite reduces their carbon emissions even though other people ironically arent willing to understand that, the people running sites are just technophobes and computing luddites who dont get crypto, with a slight general concern about safety with adding more stuff to a dangerous site.

martin_a 5y ago

BS. If all that mining capacity is sitting in Kazakhstan they will most probably not import energy from renewables in Norway or sth. like that. Their energy mix is/was 99% fossils in 2019 [0], they can't change it that quick. [0] https://www.iea.org/countries/Kazakhstan https://www.iea.org/countries/Kazakhstan

vmception 5y ago
Its an energy mix. One country isn’t the whole network. Any country that subsidized electricity distorts the whole market there. The best approach to this consternation about mining energy use is vigilance in ensuring miners use captured and renewable energy. If there are subsidies or if governments get directly involved in trying to control the network that’s when it distorts the market forces. It’s sad that this discussion is currently limited to simply not being willing to accept that captured energy has always existed and is being utilized by miners as a significant energy source on the network. Energy that would only have been used to pollute the atmosphere but now is not.