4 ms·

So let us say I do a transaction and now instead of doing it online I have to take a car and go to city 20 km away, go to the bank, withdraw and go to Western U

So let us say I do a transaction and now instead of doing it online I have to take a car and go to city 20 km away, go to the bank, withdraw and go to Western Union and send it abroad. What takes more energy? No, forbidden forbiding, please, for things like these.

assbuttbuttass 4y ago
I'll be generous and assume you use a whole gallon of gas for a 20km trip, that's approx. 34 kWh [0]. Meanwhile, a single Bitcoin transaction takes 1,173 kWh [1] [0] https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Miles_per_gallon_gasoline_equivalent#:~:text=When%20testing%20electric%20vehicles%20for,which%20converts%20to%2033.7%20kWh https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Miles_per_gallon_gas.... [1] https://fortune.com/2021/10/26/bitcoin-electricity-consumption-carbon-footprin/ https://fortune.com/2021/10/26/bitcoin-electricity-consumpti...
- germandiago 4y ago
  is it really that polluting? :O: I find myself shocked, let me take a look. Anyways, I think the real fear here is from govts. and their loss of control through fiat currency and transaction systems, honestly. But that is an entirely different topic...
- oska 4y ago
  A single transaction uses the trivial energy it takes to power the device that signs the transaction and whatever trivial amount is required to transmit it to the network. Your quoted sources make the egregious error of considering the energy used to secure the network and protocol as the energy used to process transactions. This ignorant error has been pointed out many times already in the discussion around POW.
felurx 4y ago
If you have a devive you can send crypto with, you almost certainly have a device you can use online banking with. Also, I don't really see how this is really relevant, it really sounds like a "But Sometimes" issue, where some edge case of something sucks, but that doesn't say much about if that something in total is bad or not.

assbuttbuttass 4y ago

I'll be generous and assume you use a whole gallon of gas for a 20km trip, that's approx. 34 kWh [0]. Meanwhile, a single Bitcoin transaction takes 1,173 kWh [1] [0] https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Miles_per_gallon_gasoline_equivalent#:~:text=When%20testing%20electric%20vehicles%20for,which%20converts%20to%2033.7%20kWh https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Miles_per_gallon_gas.... [1] https://fortune.com/2021/10/26/bitcoin-electricity-consumption-carbon-footprin/ https://fortune.com/2021/10/26/bitcoin-electricity-consumpti...

germandiago 4y ago
is it really that polluting? :O: I find myself shocked, let me take a look. Anyways, I think the real fear here is from govts. and their loss of control through fiat currency and transaction systems, honestly. But that is an entirely different topic...
oska 4y ago
A single transaction uses the trivial energy it takes to power the device that signs the transaction and whatever trivial amount is required to transmit it to the network. Your quoted sources make the egregious error of considering the energy used to secure the network and protocol as the energy used to process transactions. This ignorant error has been pointed out many times already in the discussion around POW.

felurx 4y ago

If you have a devive you can send crypto with, you almost certainly have a device you can use online banking with. Also, I don't really see how this is really relevant, it really sounds like a "But Sometimes" issue, where some edge case of something sucks, but that doesn't say much about if that something in total is bad or not.