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

Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US

sciencedirect.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 436 posts

Re: Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US

#171

Post by ohgodplsno »

gruez wrote: post #141
ohgodplsno wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's... called printing money. Inflation is a necessary evil and infinitely more preferable to the alternative that is bitcoin, which gives you no reason to ever use it. Why would you use it at 10k when it's going to be a 20k next month ? Inflation encourages money changing hands. The market has absolutely fuck all to do with it.

In other words, you're saying that it won't keep value?

Your $100 today will still be usable in 20 years. Sure, it'll have lost you a bit of purchasing power, but it'll still be backed by an actual nation, have its value recognized everywhere in the world.

Your bitcoin will have gone sideways three times, jumped up and down. Could be tripled. Could be halved. Still controlled by three chinese farms who could double spend at any point should it become less valuable.

Re: Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US

#172

Post by flyingfences »

cwhiz wrote: post #110
Pungsnigel wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still has usage as a potential store of value and a means of cheap global transfers. My mother in law use it monthly to transfer money to her home (third world) country, which is crazy easy and cheap compared to traditional means.

It’s easy and cheap because it is bypassing all the money laundering, KYC, and other money movement rules.

You say that as if it's a bad thing.

Re: Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US

#173

Post by fullstop »

Kye wrote: post #72
Pungsnigel wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still has usage as a potential store of value and a means of cheap global transfers. My mother in law use it monthly to transfer money to her home (third world) country, which is crazy easy and cheap compared to traditional means.

I can rent a moving truck to get groceries, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea. There might be narrow use cases, but that doesn't mean it's the best realistic way to solve every problem, and it doesn't mean it's worth the cost.

I hear what you're saying, but it's not nearly as "narrow" as you suggest. Remittances from the United States total hundreds of billions of US dollars each year [1]. Even with what I feel are bloated fees associated with Bitcoin, it is vastly cheaper than other services like Western Union.

1. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/interactives/remittance-f...

Re: Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US

#174

Post by cslarson »

Bitcoin is not sustainable even for providing for it's own security let alone from an environmental perspective. Bitcoin also gives the world very little in exchange for these massive externalized costs. It will eventually fail and the ethical loop-jumping that proponents espouse will become clear.

But other blockchain platforms are the mirror opposite. They can provide sustainable security, provided without environmental degradation, along with utility that will radically change most sectors of the economy in a similar if not even a greater degree than the internet did.

Re: Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US

#175

Post by engineer_22 »

engineer_22 wrote: post #138
HPsquared wrote: post #17

Worth noting the figures are comparing the value created in a year (2018) by mining, compared to the damage done by said year's worth of mining. Not that the cumulative damages amount to the total market cap (though this could be calculated as well)

It would be interesting to know what value the authors place on the damages caused by a typical single family home's annual electricity usage.

I did the math.

Based on US Gov't estimate the average single family home uses 11 MWh per year. [1]

And a 2018 snapshot of BTC according to the paper: price per coin: $8000 MWh per coin: 80 Damages per coin: $3,170 Damagers per MWh: $39.62

Therefore, the typical single family home produces $435 in health and environmental damage each year.... not outside the realm of possibility.

[1] https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/use-of-energy/electricit...

Re: Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US

#176

Post by read_if_gay_ »

gitrog wrote: post #98
read_if_gay_ wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That may be your point, but it was not GP's point.

If he did it on purpose, he's a supervillain, if he did it due to negligence, he's a hypocrite. No need to split hairs.

The way I understood GP they were explicitly insinuating he was a supervillain, so I don't think it's hairsplitting.

Re: Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US

#178

Post by novaRom »

rkachowski wrote: post #132

I don't understand where all these "cryptocurrency vs the environment" posts are coming from recently. The core problem is energy use, no? Things using electricity - of which bitcoin is a huge one - are powered by environmentally damaging supplies. I don't care about BTC at all, but if it were to be wiped out of existence tomorrow it would prevent further damage to the environment in exactly the same way that getting…

A long-term impact caused by money laundering may be more significant.

Re: Every $1 of BTC value responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in US

#179

Post by throwaway20875 »

kryogen1c wrote: post #100

> responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages red flag this article is steeped in pseudoscience. you could spend a lifetime trying to model and predict global weather patterns _with no outside intervention_. the idea that you could even make an attempt at attaching a number to this phenomena is laughable. what are the error bars here, 10,000%? lets pretend, for example, you tried to estimate the impact of tsu…

Hyper competitive market forces in the west have created the wrong incentives for everyone, especially institutions. When there is a demand to weaponize or politicize science then we naturally get stuff like this.
Post reply on HN