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

Bitcoin Miners Eye Nuclear Power as Environmental Criticism Mounts

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 58 posts

Re: Bitcoin Miners Eye Nuclear Power as Environmental Criticism Mounts

#11

Post by imglorp »

Closi wrote: post #2

Because bitcoins are completely decentralised and fungible, there is no real driver to Bitcoin miners paying more for renewable energy, other than the threat of government intervention. I can’t read the full article to see if there is a rebuttal though as it’s behind a paywall.

Global government intervention disincentivizing fossil plants for everyone would be a net positive. And if the miners are subsidizing the sustainable power industry, that would also be a net positive for everyone as the state of the art advances to keep up.

Re: Bitcoin Miners Eye Nuclear Power as Environmental Criticism Mounts

#12

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

It is interesting; both in title and content. Environmental criticism is not exactly that new, but happens to coincide governments realizing that it may be a little hard to contain. Environmentalism is an easy reason to give for shutting it down. Some will even cheer it.

Re: Bitcoin Miners Eye Nuclear Power as Environmental Criticism Mounts

#13

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

I've been a huge crypto skeptic for a while now, but I've actually changed my tune a bit in that I believe there is a purpose for crypto in the backend of our financial system, given how generally insane settlement procedures are today.

But long term, proof-of-work is a definite dead end. I'm not sure if Bitcoin will eventually collapse, or of it will find a way to transition to some other proof mechanism before it does so, but proof-of-work is fundamentally not viable. By design the amount of energy required to keep the network secure increases as the value of the network grows - that's the exact opposite of most endeavors, where growth gets you economies of scale which greatly reduce per-item costs.

So the only options are either that BTC has a relative ceiling on it's total value, or it eventually takes up a majority of worldwide energy use. I'm guessing the wheels will come off before the latter occurs.

Re: Bitcoin Miners Eye Nuclear Power as Environmental Criticism Mounts

#14

Post by trident5000 »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #13

I've been a huge crypto skeptic for a while now, but I've actually changed my tune a bit in that I believe there is a purpose for crypto in the backend of our financial system, given how generally insane settlement procedures are today. But long term, proof-of-work is a definite dead end. I'm not sure if Bitcoin will eventually collapse, or of it will find a way to transition to some other proof mechanism before it d…

I think thats a pretty big assumption. What about rooftop solar?...if excess energy was used to mine btc. You would have incentive for solar adoption and the most fair and distributed system possible. Not saying this is how it goes but there's possibilities out there that can make sense.

Also has anyone actually looked at the btc energy usage as a percentage of global energy usage? Its a pimple and that rate does not increase with userbase it increases with coin value which will hit a plateau.

Re: Bitcoin Miners Eye Nuclear Power as Environmental Criticism Mounts

#17

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

trident5000 wrote: post #14
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #13

I've been a huge crypto skeptic for a while now, but I've actually changed my tune a bit in that I believe there is a purpose for crypto in the backend of our financial system, given how generally insane settlement procedures are today. But long term, proof-of-work is a definite dead end. I'm not sure if Bitcoin will eventually collapse, or of it will find a way to transition to some other proof mechanism before it d…

I think thats a pretty big assumption. What about rooftop solar?...if excess energy was used to mine btc. You would have incentive for solar adoption and the most fair and distributed system possible. Not saying this is how it goes but there's possibilities out there that can make sense. Also has anyone actually looked at the btc energy usage as a percentage of global energy usage? Its a pimple and that rate does not…

Rooftop solar, nuclear, coal, oil, hydro - literally NONE of this matters.

The whole thing about proof-of-work is that it serves as a way to prove that a particular miner spent some amount of money (in the form of energy costs) validating a transaction. As the value of Bitcoin increases, then, it means there is more incentive to throw energy at the problem, because the reward you get for mining (or, for that matter, for a chain attack) is worth more.

There is no way to get out of the proof-of-work problem by deploying cheaper or more abundant forms of energy, because, again by design, it just means that any miner would need to use more of that cheaper form of energy to validate a transaction.

Re: Bitcoin Miners Eye Nuclear Power as Environmental Criticism Mounts

#18

Post by trident5000 »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #17
trident5000 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think thats a pretty big assumption. What about rooftop solar?...if excess energy was used to mine btc. You would have incentive for solar adoption and the most fair and distributed system possible. Not saying this is how it goes but there's possibilities out there that can make sense. Also has anyone actually looked at the btc energy usage as a percentage of global energy usage? Its a pimple and that rate does not…

Rooftop solar, nuclear, coal, oil, hydro - literally NONE of this matters. The whole thing about proof-of-work is that it serves as a way to prove that a particular miner spent some amount of money (in the form of energy costs) validating a transaction. As the value of Bitcoin increases, then, it means there is more incentive to throw energy at the problem, because the reward you get for mining (or, for that matter,…

The issue really comes down to that some people think its a waste of energy and some people do not. Im in the do not think its a waste camp. And as mentioned above, the hash rate is not an infinite black hole, it levels off as the price levels off regardless of userbase.

Re: Bitcoin Miners Eye Nuclear Power as Environmental Criticism Mounts

#19

Post by brighton36 »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #13

I've been a huge crypto skeptic for a while now, but I've actually changed my tune a bit in that I believe there is a purpose for crypto in the backend of our financial system, given how generally insane settlement procedures are today. But long term, proof-of-work is a definite dead end. I'm not sure if Bitcoin will eventually collapse, or of it will find a way to transition to some other proof mechanism before it d…

Proof of work allows you to buy crypto from your local power company. So long as the federal governments are restricting the purchase of crypto (or are believed to be able, to restrict) - there will be a need and use, for proof of work.

Re: Bitcoin Miners Eye Nuclear Power as Environmental Criticism Mounts

#20

Post by PragmaticPulp »

This argument doesn't make any sense. Electricity is really easy to transmit across the power grid. There is no such thing as an isolated power plant with excess electricity.

Any electricity used for Bitcoin is electricity that isn't used to take a coal-fired power plant offline somewhere else.

Post reply on HN