21–30 of 61 posts
"Power generation from solar PV is estimated to have increased by 22% in 2019, to 720 TWh" [1]
"Bitcoin miners are expected to consume roughly 130 Terawatt-hours of energy (TWh)" [2]
[1] https://www.iea.org/reports/solar-pv [2] https://techcrunch.com/2021/03/21/the-debate-about-cryptocur...
How are non-proof of work algorithms doing?
Everyone competing to find hashes that start with a large number of zeros to secure a currency is significantly less of an ecological disaster than maintaining a standing army (or military alliances with someone who does) like fiat currencies use.
Crypto millionaires are really not smart
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bitcoin can't function without the same standing armies
What a curious opinion. Care to elaborate?
The very same exchanges that make cryptocurrencies have their "value" (because, had these not been here, BTC would most likely still be under the $100 bar) rely on said army to be in a safe spot.
Hahaha not this again. More ignorance and misinterpretation of how and why energy is used. It doesn’t matter how much energy is used! What matters is how it is made, and there is no better financial incentive than renewably mined bitcoin. Eventually humanity should build acoustic Dyson spheres around nocoiners to convert their void screams into network hashrate.
I do not understand the argument, i have read it a lot in the last weeks. Does bitcoin not just incentivise the currently cheapest energy source? Which is still not renewable for most markets afaik.
Hahaha not this again. More ignorance and misinterpretation of how and why energy is used. It doesn’t matter how much energy is used! What matters is how it is made, and there is no better financial incentive than renewably mined bitcoin. Eventually humanity should build acoustic Dyson spheres around nocoiners to convert their void screams into network hashrate.
I do not understand the argument, i have read it a lot in the last weeks. Does bitcoin not just incentivise the currently cheapest energy source? Which is still not renewable for most markets afaik.
Don't get me wrong, Bitcoin is an ecological nightmare and I think it should be shunned accordingly. But the "fun-fact" that it consumes more energy than solar produces is false. "Power generation from solar PV is estimated to have increased by 22% in 2019, to 720 TWh" [1] "Bitcoin miners are expected to consume roughly 130 Terawatt-hours of energy (TWh)" [2] [1] https://www.iea.org/reports/solar-pv [2] https://techc…
Compared with other forms of currency, how does it stack up?