5 ms·
Most of what you said I agree with, but not your last point: > Either way, we're going to need Fusion to run it in the future. In my understanding, the econom
by ssl232 4y ago
Most of what you said I agree with, but not your last point:
> Either way, we're going to need Fusion to run it in the future.
In my understanding, the economics of Bitcoin mean that eventually mining will be performed with predominantly waste energy, which is by definition that which has no other practical use. The existence of a practical use for the energy other than for mining will push its price higher than is economical to use for Bitcoin mining, because other miners using waste energy will be able to pay less to mine the next block. It's likely that energy for Bitcoin mining will come from sources like heat from flare gas, currently just burned at oil refineries and released as photons into the night sky, leaving Earth forever. Or energy from wind turbines or solar panels during periods of low demand. Or a hydroelectric dam 1000s of km from civilisation willing to pay the transmission costs to use it. Or, heck, even heat extracted from sewage in Vegas hotels, if it's enough to run a steam turbine. Basically anywhere where otherwise useless energy can be extracted in quantities sufficient for mining. I don't think, given the costs of the infrastructure likely required for fusion, we'll be seeing it employed for Bitcoin mining long term.
This is one of the aspects of Bitcoin I find most beautiful - it monetises waste.
- austinjp 4y agoEhm.... "waste energy"? I'm not sure there is such a thing. If it can be harvested and used, why should it be used for Bitcoin instead of... well, anything else?
- quarky93 4y agoBecause energy (at least currently) can not be easily transported, to where it can be used. Factories can not easily move to power plants due perhaps increased supply chain cost or labor cost. Whereas Bitcoin mining can be moved anywhere with a shed and an internet connection.
- nradov 4y agoAluminum smelters are specifically sited to be near low cost power plants. Refined aluminum is essentially a storable and somewhat portable form of energy.
- ephbit 4y agoGood. Now try turning an aluminium smelter on and off when there's surplus/shortage of supply on the grid. Right, you don't. Here's one key difference between many if not most large scale industrial processes and Bitcoin mining.
- austinjp 4y agoI still don't see the prerogative for bitcoin. Yes, most industrial processes are inefficient and we can and should reclaim lost energy. There are many ways to do this, and many purposes. Charging batteries seems the most reasonable: making the energy stable and portable. Admittedly I don't know much about battery efficiency, so there may be other more efficient uses. Hydroponics lighting? Where "waste energy" is difficult to access and available only in trickles, it's surely very unsuitable for bitcoin mining, which is energy intensive. Frankly, there are far more pressing issues than making more bitcoin.
- stouset 4y agoWho exactly do you think is going to be building the expensive infrastructure necessary to capture this low-value waste energy? Sure, there’s conceivably times of low demand when some energy would otherwise go unused. But a “ hydroelectric dam 1000s of km from civilisation”? Heat extractors in Vegas hotels? You’re imagining a fantasy world. Further, what you’re ignoring is that none of this is “waste”. It’s already being stored or used. Finding new demand for it simply makes it more expensive for existing users.
- ssl232 4y agoI'm not sure you understood my comment correctly.
- ephbit 4y ago> ... none of this is “waste”. It’s already being stored or used. Turned off wind turbines at times of surplus. They tell us that nope, it is not (yet) being used or stored. > Finding new demand for it simply makes it more expensive for existing users. It's not that simple. It could very well be the case that selling a portion of energy that otherwise has no demand to a buyer of last resort enables the business to be profitable. Not selling this portion of energy would mean that the operator would have to charge their other customers more in order to be profitable. So it could in fact make things less expensive indeed.