Live data from Hacker News

Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

cbeci.org

521–530 of 1001 posts

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#521
post #439
post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the alternative is simply just using Proof of Stake and lowering the energy consumption by an estimated 99%, yes, we can be judgmental of how others use energy in this specific case. It's not Bitcoin/PoW or no cryptocurrencies at all, that's a false dichotomy, if that's what you're implying.

Good luck with that. The bitcoin core folks can't even agree to change blocksizes to increase transaction throughput. Switching to PoS is highly unlikely.

True, but the rest of us can switch blockchains.

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#522
I like the fun-facts on this page: "The amount of electricity consumed every year by always-on but inactive home devices in the USA alone could power the Bitcoin network for 1.8 years" Where is the discussion about the smart home devices using that much energy? This is horrible, thats twice as the Bitcoin network and this is just the USA. I would really like if someone estimate the energy usage (with all trucks and cars and people and companies and buildings and so on) of other things than just whole countries, maybe the "normal" financial system, or plastic bottles or something everyone is using (like idle smart devices).

I think most people missing the main point: Energy is to cheap. Most miners are in China, an they seem to pay nearly nothing for the energy (else they would'nt do it). This would mean they waste Energy on EVERYTHING, not only Bitcoin mining. In Germany I would never even think about mining Bitcoin, since I have to pay 0,35€ per kWh. But if I would buy thousends of miners and waste 5MW of energy, I would have to pay roughtly 0,15€ (maybe even just 0,05€). So wasting energy is profitable, is'nt this strange?

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#523
post #332

How much energy does watching porn consume? Playing video games? Watching a movie? Browsing Facebook? Using a ski chair? Visiting an amusement park? Going in vacation? Cooking your favorite type of food? Making ice cream? Driving to your friends? Listening to music? Concerts? Having a party? Banking? Casinos? As a species we use energy to meet our goals. Those goals may be situated anywhere in our hierarchy of needs.…

But here's the thing: This article didn't say anything bad about Bitcoin's energy usage. It's simply quantifying it.

If quantifying the energy usage of Bitcoin makes you angry, you should probably self-reflect a bit.

This is a very unbiased source, and nothing they have published is untrue.

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#524
post #332

How much energy does watching porn consume? Playing video games? Watching a movie? Browsing Facebook? Using a ski chair? Visiting an amusement park? Going in vacation? Cooking your favorite type of food? Making ice cream? Driving to your friends? Listening to music? Concerts? Having a party? Banking? Casinos? As a species we use energy to meet our goals. Those goals may be situated anywhere in our hierarchy of needs.…

The problem is that Bitcoin doesn't need to use this much energy. We've now discovered distributed consensus algorithms that don't rely on Proof of Work, so it's really quite terrible we still waste so much by using an outdated consensus algorithm.

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#525
post #423
post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once you understand Bitcoin, there's no way why you'd go back to the legacy system. It's not Bitcoiners getting freaking rich; it's them adopting a superior store of value that is being selected as the winner in a free market. Most people are perfectly happy entrusting their (fiat) money with the banks, and asking permission for accessing their funds. Bitcoiners, on the other hand, have tasted the freedom of self-cus…

> there's no way why you'd go back to the legacy system I can think of lots of reasons. * Deflationary currencies are dangerous. Inflation is a feature, not a bug. * If I screw up a bank transfer or have my credit card details stolen, I can have those transactions reversed. No such luck with Bitcoin. The idea of losing my life’s savings to a zero day or sophisticated hacker doesn’t sounds great to me. * I can’t remem…

Fortunately, no one is forcing anyone to adopt Bitcoin, if the features are undesirable.

> Deflationary currencies are dangerous. Inflation is a feature, not a bug.

You may be right, but we can't stop a community from choosing something deflationary as their preferred currency.

> I can have those transactions reversed. No such luck with Bitcoin

I'd argue this is a feature in Bitcoin for many people.

> I can’t remember the last time my bank got DoSed.

You're fortunate. Last time I went to a bank (right after COVID hit), I was denied cash withdrawals due to liquidity issues. That's what happens when your money is in custody of someone else. Once you look outside first world countries, you'll see the demerits of centralised systems handling critical resources like money.

> Bitcoin’s value fluctuates wildly, making it a poor medium of exchange.

I'll agree with this point. Perhaps it's because of the nature of the market itself. Bitcoin trades globally, 24x7 and 365 days a year, without circuit breakers when there's extreme volatility. It's not appropriate for buying candies from a store, but maybe a good option for a Tesla?

> I like that my country can adjust monetary policy in response to world events like pandemics.

On the contrary, people holding Bitcoin during the pandemic were relatively well off in 2020. The stimulus package had negative impacts too, like asset inflation. But more concretely, Bitcoin is the first true alternative to central banking, and many people are happy to adopt it because it solves important problems for them.

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#526
post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If maintaining the infrastructure for something a miniscule percentage of the world's population benefit from requires more energy than entire countries, surely it's worth interrogating whether the benefits outweigh the costs?

> interrogating whether the benefits outweigh the costs What does this mean, in practice? Who investigates and what is the outcome? Do the things OP listed above warrant a similar investigation?

Yes - nowadays I think pretty much everything that uses a lot of energy comes under scrutiny, and, in particular people look to see if the same outcome can't be achieved with less energy

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#527

At that rate and assuming 4tx per second a single Bitcoin transaction consumes 165kWh. A Tesla battery is bit over 50kWh. So let's round that to 3 full charges of Tesla battery. That's 350km/220 miles of range per charge. In total 1050km or 660 miles of driving. So basically if you want to transfer money and the recipient is closer than 660 miles from you it's more efficient to just get a bunch of bills, drive there…

The downside of driving your tesla with a case full of bills is that there's no immutable world-wide distributed record of your transaction making it irreversible.

Many would see that as an upside. Irreversible transactions are not very desirable to a lot of folks, particularly where it comes to the consumer side of things.

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#528
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…

> could this become a future reason for governments to criminalise the trading / use of Bitcoin because of negative environmental effects?

The whole point of Bitcoin is resistance to adversity. Bitcoin value is directly correlated to its resistance against governments/agencies/bankers/regulation or anything else that wants to shut it down. If you can wrap your head around that, you'll understand why making bitcoin more eco-friendly from a centralized government or organization will suddenly make it less valuable.

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#529
The pressures for electricity demand has helped drive research and innovation in renewable energies. In some way, the quest for bitcoin has helped renewables get off the ground.

I personally don't mind this extra demand on our electric production, as I believe it will help get us to a renewable energy sources even sooner.

Re: Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index

#530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem that you and others like you have is you don't have any BTC and now are struggling to understand why anyone else would have any. I think it's mostly from the fact you didn't get any when you should have and now there is no reason as it's expensive and again you don't have any. Simple really.

I think this is a heavy-handed reply. His personal lack of an answer to the question, "what's the value," is presumably why he didn't buy in at the beginning. Also, even if he had two or three Bitcoin it would be a nice windfall, but not an earth-shattering event that would cause eternal jealousy.

People are asking a pretty basic question on a supposedly technological forum. It would be like me asking what's the point of Linux, the OS problem was solved by (D)OS(X), or something similar. I'll admit the reply is heavy handed but there is a reason Bitcoin exists and people are using it so when do these questions stop?
Post reply on HN