3 ms·
> this comes up _every single time_ crypto proponents are trying to seed FUD And it's worth pointing out that it comes up every single time without a shred evi
by elevaet 3y ago
> this comes up _every single time_ crypto proponents are trying to seed FUD
And it's worth pointing out that it comes up every single time without a shred evidence, just a hunch that the crypto enthusiast ensures us is correct. I'd love to see some actual numbers on the energy consumption of the banking industry vs. crypto.
Or lets be real, let's compare the amount of energy used by the banking sector to provide the same store of value and 3 transactions per second or whatever minor utility BTC provides.
- digging 3y ago> And it's worth pointing out that it comes up every single time without a shred evidence What evidence could I possibly provide for the claim "This article doesn't give any evidence of impact." It is very clear that crypto transactions, for example, are much less energy-efficient than USD transactions. The article could have easily mentioned that, but it didn't.
- elevaet 3y agoWell earlier in this same thread: > Visa used 189GWh in 2017, worldwide, of which around half was data centres [1]. That handled 111.2 billion transactions, so about 1.7Wh per transaction (half for datacentres). Bitcoin used 844670Wh per transaction. That's about 500 000x more energy consumed per transaction by BTC than Visa. I guess it goes without saying that it's much less efficient. For years now I encounter crypto enthusiasts have been suggesting that BTC is an improvement on the energy efficiency of traditional banking, without anything to back up this claim, and ignoring stats like the above over and over again.