7 ms·

Agreed. My top concern with cryptocurrency is the huge waste of energy inherent to PoW. It's really, really good to see ETH pull this off. There are a pile of o

Agreed. My top concern with cryptocurrency is the huge waste of energy inherent to PoW. It's really, really good to see ETH pull this off. There are a pile of other problems in crypto, but it's fantastic to see this biggest (IMO) issue addressed by the #2 cryptocurrency. I actually thought it might never happen. It's a day to celebrate for sure.

joshspankit 4y ago
Honestly, PoW seems like a big problem but the reality is that miners have been boosting the solar companies. Solar is cheaper than most other power sources and any miner will tell you that the cheaper the power the more profit they make.
- oofbey 4y ago
  Miners are turning back on shuttered fossil fuel burning power stations. Pumping carbon into the air for zero public benefit. of course they’d prefer cheaper power if they could get it - everybody does. But just because they prefer clean power in no way excuses the huge waste of carbon that powers most mining.
- mort96 4y ago
  What does it help to build solar power plants only to use up all of that capacity on useless computations? All else being equal, building solar panels is a negative; producing and transporting solar panels consumes materials and produces CO2. The reason building solar power plants is usually good is that they reduce the need for even worse forms of energy production. If you build a solar farm, just to waste all or most of the energy it generates, what you have done is a net negative for the environment. This is in addition to the fact that a whole lot of mining uses existing infrastructure, which negates the gains from building out clean energy and keeps demand high enough to require dirty energy, as /u/oofbey covered.
  - TheCapeGreek 4y ago
    Another way to look at it is that by using solar for mining, other forms of capacity are not wasted in the same way. The waste is then in using up of materials and manufacturing that would go to "ordinary" use otherwise.
    - mort96 4y ago
      But we could just build solar power and not use it for mining.
      - JulianChastain 4y ago
        The excess solar panels won't be built if there isn't demand for them. PoW mining creates that demand
        mort96 4y ago
        So we have two possible worlds: 1. We build 1TW of solar panels, PoW mining uses that 1TW to do useless work. 2. We don't build 1TW of solar panels, and don't do that additional 1TW of useless work. Worlds 1 and 2 have the same impact on the electricity grid. But in world 1, we're emitting a whole lot of CO2 and consuming a whole lot of rare materials to build solar farms and electronics, while in world 2 we don't. Clearly world 2 is better for the environment?
        joshspankit 4y ago
        What if world 1 meant that for the cost of 1TW of useless work we created the infrastructure to build 30TW at $0.001 per Watt?
        ElectricalUnion 4y ago
        Unless some very serious technical breakthroughs happens in more efficient manufacture, energy capture efficiency and energy storage, by the point that around 1% of Earth is covered in solar panels, Earth probably ran out of "useless" land space and materials to make solar panels and the associated infrastructure to actually use said energy to something useful.
  - joshspankit 4y ago
    > What does it help to build solar power plants only to use up all of that capacity on useless computations? > All else being equal, building solar panels is a negative; producing and transporting solar panels consumes materials and produces CO2. The reason building solar power plants is usually good is that they reduce the need for even worse forms of energy production. If you build a solar farm, just to waste all or most of the energy it generates, what you have done is a net negative for the environment. I agree with this in the short term, but my argument is more about economies of scale: The more people want large amounts of solar, the better companies get at producing it and the cheaper it gets. Because of that cheapness fossil fuels could be taken off the table completely resulting in a short-term downside (losing resources and producing CO2 for unnecessary computations), but a long-term win (a world free from fossil fuels) > This is in addition to the fact that a whole lot of mining uses existing infrastructure, which negates the gains from building out clean energy and keeps demand high enough to require dirty energy, as /u/oofbey covered. Fair. Just because miners in general are ravenous for solar does not mean that all individual miners are able or willing to use solar “off the grid”. I’m not saying it’s perfect or that PoW is the right direction, I’m only pointing out that it’s not the absolute evil that it’s been painted as.
  - landemva 4y ago
    "The reason building solar power plants is usually good ... " 1) remote setup, or 2) tax incentives. Also, green accountants may want to account for solar panel e-waste disposal in a about twenty years.
  - Transisto 4y ago
    The answer to your question is simply Halvings, every four year the quantity of energy used halves in bitcoin terms but the infrastructure remain and can be repurposed to more profitable uses.
exabyte 4y ago
Imagine trying to quantify the amount of energy that goes into the current financial system with all its inefficiencies and manpower, time and energy that it takes. I would love to see this number compared to the amount of energy PoW consumes.
- hahaxdxd123 4y ago
  Come on man, this is a bad faith argument. Show me a smart contract that can issue an undercollateralized loan. Turns out that takes manpower, time, and energy to underwrite this stuff.
  - TGIF 4y ago
    Flash loans happen all day every day for millions of dolllars with zero collateral
  - losermode 4y ago
    coming soon https://blog.chain.link/undercollateralized-lending-teller-deco-poc/ https://blog.chain.link/undercollateralized-lending-teller-d...
  - Waterluvian 4y ago
    Banks are also far more competent at being financially efficient. It’s kind of their thing. This sounds like the typical, “other industry is run by dumb people. They need us tech devs to come civilize them.”
- sMarsIntruder 4y ago
  You got downvoted because “PoW is bad for the environment” is a strong mainstream argument. PoS is pure oligarchy but people loves it because “it saves the planet!!1” Eventually, people will understand differences.
  - sMarsIntruder 4y ago

joshspankit 4y ago

Honestly, PoW seems like a big problem but the reality is that miners have been boosting the solar companies. Solar is cheaper than most other power sources and any miner will tell you that the cheaper the power the more profit they make.

oofbey 4y ago
Miners are turning back on shuttered fossil fuel burning power stations. Pumping carbon into the air for zero public benefit. of course they’d prefer cheaper power if they could get it - everybody does. But just because they prefer clean power in no way excuses the huge waste of carbon that powers most mining.
mort96 4y ago
What does it help to build solar power plants only to use up all of that capacity on useless computations? All else being equal, building solar panels is a negative; producing and transporting solar panels consumes materials and produces CO2. The reason building solar power plants is usually good is that they reduce the need for even worse forms of energy production. If you build a solar farm, just to waste all or most of the energy it generates, what you have done is a net negative for the environment. This is in addition to the fact that a whole lot of mining uses existing infrastructure, which negates the gains from building out clean energy and keeps demand high enough to require dirty energy, as /u/oofbey covered.
- TheCapeGreek 4y ago
  Another way to look at it is that by using solar for mining, other forms of capacity are not wasted in the same way. The waste is then in using up of materials and manufacturing that would go to "ordinary" use otherwise.
  - mort96 4y ago
    But we could just build solar power and not use it for mining.
    - JulianChastain 4y ago
      The excess solar panels won't be built if there isn't demand for them. PoW mining creates that demand
      - mort96 4y ago
        So we have two possible worlds: 1. We build 1TW of solar panels, PoW mining uses that 1TW to do useless work. 2. We don't build 1TW of solar panels, and don't do that additional 1TW of useless work. Worlds 1 and 2 have the same impact on the electricity grid. But in world 1, we're emitting a whole lot of CO2 and consuming a whole lot of rare materials to build solar farms and electronics, while in world 2 we don't. Clearly world 2 is better for the environment?
        joshspankit 4y ago
        What if world 1 meant that for the cost of 1TW of useless work we created the infrastructure to build 30TW at $0.001 per Watt?
        ElectricalUnion 4y ago
        Unless some very serious technical breakthroughs happens in more efficient manufacture, energy capture efficiency and energy storage, by the point that around 1% of Earth is covered in solar panels, Earth probably ran out of "useless" land space and materials to make solar panels and the associated infrastructure to actually use said energy to something useful.
- joshspankit 4y ago
  > What does it help to build solar power plants only to use up all of that capacity on useless computations? > All else being equal, building solar panels is a negative; producing and transporting solar panels consumes materials and produces CO2. The reason building solar power plants is usually good is that they reduce the need for even worse forms of energy production. If you build a solar farm, just to waste all or most of the energy it generates, what you have done is a net negative for the environment. I agree with this in the short term, but my argument is more about economies of scale: The more people want large amounts of solar, the better companies get at producing it and the cheaper it gets. Because of that cheapness fossil fuels could be taken off the table completely resulting in a short-term downside (losing resources and producing CO2 for unnecessary computations), but a long-term win (a world free from fossil fuels) > This is in addition to the fact that a whole lot of mining uses existing infrastructure, which negates the gains from building out clean energy and keeps demand high enough to require dirty energy, as /u/oofbey covered. Fair. Just because miners in general are ravenous for solar does not mean that all individual miners are able or willing to use solar “off the grid”. I’m not saying it’s perfect or that PoW is the right direction, I’m only pointing out that it’s not the absolute evil that it’s been painted as.
- landemva 4y ago
  "The reason building solar power plants is usually good ... " 1) remote setup, or 2) tax incentives. Also, green accountants may want to account for solar panel e-waste disposal in a about twenty years.
- Transisto 4y ago
  The answer to your question is simply Halvings, every four year the quantity of energy used halves in bitcoin terms but the infrastructure remain and can be repurposed to more profitable uses.

exabyte 4y ago

Imagine trying to quantify the amount of energy that goes into the current financial system with all its inefficiencies and manpower, time and energy that it takes. I would love to see this number compared to the amount of energy PoW consumes.

hahaxdxd123 4y ago
Come on man, this is a bad faith argument. Show me a smart contract that can issue an undercollateralized loan. Turns out that takes manpower, time, and energy to underwrite this stuff.
- TGIF 4y ago
  Flash loans happen all day every day for millions of dolllars with zero collateral
- losermode 4y ago
  coming soon https://blog.chain.link/undercollateralized-lending-teller-deco-poc/ https://blog.chain.link/undercollateralized-lending-teller-d...
- Waterluvian 4y ago
  Banks are also far more competent at being financially efficient. It’s kind of their thing. This sounds like the typical, “other industry is run by dumb people. They need us tech devs to come civilize them.”
sMarsIntruder 4y ago
You got downvoted because “PoW is bad for the environment” is a strong mainstream argument. PoS is pure oligarchy but people loves it because “it saves the planet!!1” Eventually, people will understand differences.
- sMarsIntruder 4y ago