Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bitcoin miners are buying power plants

nysfocus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 578 posts

Re: Bitcoin miners are buying power plants

#181

Post by zapdrive »

SwimSwimHungry wrote: post #103
baron816 wrote: post #88

Easy solution: tax carbon emissions. Who cares if you’re using energy to mine Bitcoin? Or if you’re using it to play video games? Or to run the AC all day? If it you’re internalizing the cost of any emissions, then you’ll use those resources efficiently.

Hard to do this when you can have other countries with much looser regulations allow Bitcoin miners run rampant. What probably should happen is to make converting from any cryptocurrency to major world currencies a crime. I have no delusions that this will halt activity in this sector entirely, but it will make it reasonably difficult to make any substantial money this way without raising some serious eyebrows.

> What probably should happen is to make converting from any cryptocurrency to major world currencies a crime.

Lol.. and that will stop all crypto-world currency trading? Just like how making drugs illegal stopped all drug trade?

Re: Bitcoin miners are buying power plants

#182

Post by lottin »

shawnz wrote: post #164
SwimSwimHungry wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's the problem with this sentiment. Bitcoin isn't replacing anything. Not pre-existing fiat currency, not banks, nothing. Bitcoin only adds to the problem at an alarming rate. Bitcoin is certainly not a scapegoat. It's a massive problem and, largely, a symptom of human greed that must be put in check.

So, are you saying that new technologies must be considered wasteful if they don't wholly replace existing technologies and instead create new usages of their own? For example would you say that smartphones are wasteful because they allow us to communicate more frequently than we could before, thus they don't strictly replace an existing consumption of energy? That seems like a silly interpretation to me. Of course o…

The argument is not so much that cryptocurrencies don't replace anything as that they don't have a use case (this is something that we can observe, unlike "value" which is subjective), and therefore it could be argued they are objectively useless regardless of their actual value in the market.

Re: Bitcoin miners are buying power plants

#183

Post by jude- »

SwimSwimHungry wrote: post #154
jude- wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why are you handwaving away my concerns? Calm down. > Speaking of which, can you quantify what things pollute more? You're all over the comments trying to pin the blame for CO2 emissions on the the existence of PoW cryptocurrencies. But if you stop and think about the problem for more than 5 seconds, you'll realize that it's the CO2 emissions , not cryptocurrencies, that are the problem. They were a problem before…

Oh boy, someone on the Internet wants me to calm down because I point out that they are making a lazy point. Sheesh, tough crowd! Whether you realize it or not, you can want to not burn fossil fuels, but if there's a profit to be made doing it, believe me, enough miners will bend their morality to make a profit. You act like everyone involved in this experiment has pure intentions. I'd argue that's untrue.

You'd be a lot more convincing if you weren't in the throes of a hissyfit over something that's 0.5% of the US's total CO2 output in 2019. It's not great, but it's far from the worst problem. Like, bad building insulation in 2016 is responsible for _3x_ the CO2 emissions of Bitcoin _today_.

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26829795.

Re: Bitcoin miners are buying power plants

#184

Post by orangecat »

fergie wrote: post #162
baron816 wrote: post #88

Easy solution: tax carbon emissions. Who cares if you’re using energy to mine Bitcoin? Or if you’re using it to play video games? Or to run the AC all day? If it you’re internalizing the cost of any emissions, then you’ll use those resources efficiently.

Why tax carbon emissions rather than directly taxing the manufacture of bitcoin? Carbon taxes increase costs for everything. Should we increase the cost of say, hospitals because some people _really_ want to mine bitcoin?

Why tax carbon emissions rather than directly taxing the manufacture of bitcoin?

Because carbon emissions do the same amount damage whether it's the result of bitcoin mining or running a hospital.

Carbon taxes increase costs for everything.

Everything that produces carbon, which is exactly the point.

Should we increase the cost of say, hospitals

To the extent that they are significant polluters, yes. Trying to micromanage "good" and "bad" emissions just encourages exploiting loopholes. (e.g. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/cafe-lo...)

Re: Bitcoin miners are buying power plants

#185

Post by SwimSwimHungry »

jude- wrote: post #173
abduhl wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You didn’t answer their question. Can you quantify what things pollute more?

Here, let me Google that for you. First, let's assume for a moment that this February 2021 CNBC source [1] is correct in that Bitcoin mining produces 36.94 megatons of CO2 per year. The original source the CNBC article cited can be found here: [3] (which currently pegs Bitcoin at 47.62 megatons/year). According to the EPA, the US economy alone produced 6,558 megatons of CO2 [2] in 2019 (i.e. under pre-COVID emissions…

My response to you is quite simple. Unlike virtually every other technology that's been created (like computers, cars, smartphones, etc), Bitcoin simply exists in a form where the primary purpose is to waste energy, and the system inherently incentivizes it.

Also, the issue of bad building insulation does not in any manner invalidate my concern with the growing problem of Bitcoin now and in the future. Bad building insulation can also be fixed relatively easily, and the incentive for a fix would be an energy cost savings to the property owner. Bitcoin is the exact opposite of this. In order for the network to remain secure, it must burn copious amounts of energy.

That is my general outrage summarized there. And that doesn't even begin my issues pertaining to lack of user friendliness surrounding cryptocurrencies (not your keys, not your coins), how it suckers people into something they don't fully understand (people see $$$ and throw money at it without quantifying the proper risks - see the crashes from 2013 and 2017 and all the run on exchanges that left people empty handed), the absolutely awful existence of ransomware, and the constant tape painting with tethers (which by the way, we still can't get a proper audit on them and they are just about as opaque as the Fed is with regards to the Federal Reserve).

I believe I've made my points at this juncture. We may have to simply agree to disagree otherwise.

Re: Bitcoin miners are buying power plants

#186

Post by admax88q »

All this talk about Bitcoin causing global warming is starting to feel like a targetted misinformation campaign.

Yes it's wasteful, and yes it's using a fair amount of energy at the moment. But all estimates show it's still a very small fraction of the problem.

It feels like we spend a disproportionate amount of time talking about bitcoins carbon footprint for its size.

Re: Bitcoin miners are buying power plants

#188

Post by afc »

SwimSwimHungry wrote: post #73
doomroot wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds rather rash.

I thought bitcoin wanted to be outside of the traditional banking system? Or are bitcoin fans afraid they won't be able to easily get suckers to pump the coins sky high without the fiat (but mostly unbacked tethers) flowing in?

I was reading a few of your comments in this thread and just figured I'd point out, as candidly as I can, that you come across as extremely biased against cryptocurrencies, using very manipulative language to advance your position (e.g., anyone who disagrees with you is "part of the circle jerk", Bitcoin fans want to "get suckers to pump the coins sky high", Bitcoin "is a symptom of human greed that must be put in check", etc.).

Would you say that your goal is to advance these discussions towards the truth (i.e., to make insightful comments that may be useful)? I'm left with a strong impression that it is, rather, to advance one political position/agenda (cryptocurrencies are evil) as strongly as you can, which is neither intellectually honest nor particularly useful.

Re: Bitcoin miners are buying power plants

#189

Post by bb88 »

ayngg wrote: post #159
bransonf wrote: post #94

It’s a simple equation: So long as there is more money in mining BTC than there is cost in energy to mine it, mining will proceed. No entity in the world can control the price of crypto. But, we can and already do regulate energy production. I think we need a carbon tax, that is specifically a financial disincentive towards any means of energy production that directly pollutes the atmosphere. Seriously, what are the…

To me it seems like Bitcoin (and other pow cryptocurrencies) are almost like the climate change scapegoat for a number of social and economic issues that have seemingly come to a head recently to facilitate their rise. People mine because it is expensive, it isn't the other way around, so the real questions we should be asking in good faith are things like "Why it is profitable in the first place?" and I think it is…

> People mine because it is expensive, it isn't the other way around, so the real questions we should be asking in good faith are things like "Why it is profitable in the first place?"

FOMO, mining lotteries, and the guise of financial innovation are typical cover stories here. But all stocks and other publicly traded investments are basically making a bet that others will buy in after you do, raising the price higher. Most stock owners hope this very thing, though some stocks actually pay dividends on profits. The same is true with BTC with the added benefit of that novel mining lottery thing going for it.

> These are some of the questions among others which I think probably provide a better understanding of what is happening than the overly simplistic 'ponzi scam' explanation that has been repeated ad nauseam since its inception.

So what if the rich have too much money? That would explain a lot. It would explain why GME stock was shorted %140 of float.

It would also explain why politicians are so ineffective at regulation. If you were rich, would you want effective politicians? No. You would put your money behind the least effective politicians.

It would also explain why most institutions have become less trustworthy in the eye of the public, as big money has corrupted the system.

And finally it would explain the gold rush on BTC. Because they need new investment vehicles.

Re: Bitcoin miners are buying power plants

#190

Post by SwimSwimHungry »

afc wrote: post #188
SwimSwimHungry wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought bitcoin wanted to be outside of the traditional banking system? Or are bitcoin fans afraid they won't be able to easily get suckers to pump the coins sky high without the fiat (but mostly unbacked tethers) flowing in?

I was reading a few of your comments in this thread and just figured I'd point out, as candidly as I can, that you come across as extremely biased against cryptocurrencies, using very manipulative language to advance your position (e.g., anyone who disagrees with you is "part of the circle jerk", Bitcoin fans want to "get suckers to pump the coins sky high", Bitcoin "is a symptom of human greed that must be put in ch…

Your assumption about me is correct. I am extremely biased against cryptocurrencies. And that's bad how? Do you have a sizable position in these instruments that you are afraid would be affected by my dialogue?

And my point about circle jerks is prevalent all over social media. Open your eyes man. The Winklevoss Twins, Jack @ Twitter, Elon Musk. All of them have a vested interest in abusing their influence to push this non-productive asset to new heights, so they can then promote the greater fool theory with impressive effects.

These folks, and countless others, are only interested in becoming the new 1% off the backs of others. That's not a great look.

Post reply on HN