Live data from Hacker News

Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

cbeci.org

171–180 of 1001 posts

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#171
post #12

Does anyone have any figures on what regular banking systems use for accepted/official currencies? I feel like this has blown up so much that it makes sense to compare and contrast.

I have the idea that banking for a country the size of Argentina uses much, much less energy than bitcoin mining, yet serves more people than bitcoin.

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#172
post #106

Bitcoin every consumption halves every two years since the mining profit halfs. Thus mining bitcoins becomes less profitable and thus more energy efficient over time. In the other, if the price increases faster than the mining yield drops, efficiency is decreased.

This is incorrect. The mining reward halves every 4 years, but if the price of bitcoin goes up then so does the value of the reward. Also it is a bit of an arms race so more power is required to power more machines,to mine the same number of bitcoin.

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#173
post #48
post #4

Perhaps not all of it is entirely "wasted" though. I've largely been able to avoid heating this winter as a result of crypto mining. A computer pumping ~300W into the air 24/7 is remarkably effective for a small apartment

Can you successfully mine bitcoin with one computer these days?

Well I'm mining conflux [0] not bitcoin.

And yeah that does seem to be "profitable". A 2070 Super card seems to net me a couple of bucks a day...enough to offset the cost. Probably not profitable in the true sense, but hey free heating is a win for personal finances.

[0] https://confluxnetwork.org/

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#174
post #7

Question that came to mind after reading the headline: could this become a future reason for governments to criminalise the trading / use of Bitcoin because of negative environmental effects? On the surface it seems the value of Bitcoin is directly tied to its energy consumption and thus environmental harm. I get that Bitcoin itself is decentralised and cannot be banned outright. But could it be neutered in such a wa…

Will anyone criminalise the US army because they use lots of energy? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_usage_of_the_United_Sta... The answer: they might try, but good luck with that.

We always have to take into account the usefulness of what we spend energy on.

It's not as simple as calling out the top energy users and saying we should start there.

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#175
post #23

From what I understand bitcoin currently has a $20+ transaction fee with a transaction time takes 60 minutes+ With these issues in addition to the high power consumption, how will Bitcoin become a usable currency?

The last years were the strongest indicator that bitcoin will not become any kind of usable currency. Seeing that it is as volatile as ever I'm honestly not sure what bitcoin can even still become except yet another abstract plaything to "invest" (bet) money on, the very thing it has been for a while now. Also while it is decentralized, the reality of how it is used is very much not. The typical use case is buying an…

Right or wrong, the theory is that eventually it will stabilize and then the early adopters got a reward for commiting early.

This isn't so different from any network.

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#176
post #134

Well, we need to build houses with bitcoin miners for heat generation. (Idea stolen from guy on reddit who actually did this)

And who is gonna foot the bill for the mining?

You already pay to heat your house, what if you could be paid to hear your house?

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Electricity is one of the most inefficient ways to heat a dwelling. I think natural gas is still considered to be several times more efficient but I haven’t looked at it in a few years. Of course if you are also getting benefits from the crypto you mined that will offset the cost.

Electricity is 100% efficient in a resistance heater, in that all the electricity used is turned to heat. However, it is considerably more expensive per unit heat than natural gas, even though you may only get 70-90% efficiency with your boiler or furnace. A heat pump can be even more efficient, though. An electric heat pump can be more than 100% efficient, in that each watt of electricity can be used to move more th…

If electricity is made combusting fossil fuels at a power plant at say 40-50% effciency thats the problem.

If your using fossil fuels for heat its more efficient to burn them directly at point needed and capture the heat, rather than use the heat to convert to mechanical then electrical then back into heat.

Air source heat pumps are basically solar assisted, they move heat from outside air into heated space using electricity which also contributes resistive heat in compressor friction. The outside air is heated by the sun.

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#178

I'm tired of this BS about Bitcoin and pollution. So tired that yesterday I wrote this [0]. Of course you might be in complete disagreement with me, but please read it and let me know what you think. Be kind. I am trying to have a good conversation about it, not to impose my view. [0]: https://simon.medium.com/bitcoin-and-pollution-the-definitiv...

You'll have a hard time convincing people that Bitcoin is OK by comparing it gold since most people who think Bitcoin is wasteful would also think mining of gold is very wasteful. Moreover, I feel like you're making the mistake you highlight in your first paragraph: conflating 'mining' in gold with 'mining' in BTC. Bitcoin mining is necessary for transactions to occur, not so for gold. It's a very foggy comparison as far as I can tell.

Your comparison to VISA links to a source that says that better comparison is Fedwire and that it only settles 1% of the money that FedWire does. So Bitcoin significantly loses to VISA in transaction count and FedWire in value settled. So I'm not convinced by your argument. And how much energy does Fedwire use? Presumably much less than VISA.

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#180
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It won't and even BTC enthusiasts have given up on that. They narrative is now that BTC is a "store of value".

Exactly. Here's VC and prominent cryptocurrency enthusiast Fred Wilson saying exactly that: https://avc.com/2017/08/store-of-value-vs-payment-system/ While I agree with him that Bitcoin is a terrible currency, I think the "store of value" thing is nonsense as well. Stores of value need to have relatively stable value. Bitcoin is hugely volatile. That's great for speculation, but nobody with any sense would use it as…

What incentive will there be for the community to continue verifying transactions after all the bitcoins are mined?

Is it just that the system of storage will have Ongoing operational cost like a vault has ongoing costs to protect gold?

Has anyone modeled what these costs might look like?

Post reply on HN