Bitcoin Forum

Criticizing Bitcoin for its high energy consumption is analogous to criticizing the fire brigade for consuming an excessive amount of water.

I've only been interested in Bitcoin for a year and a half. Would you agree with this remark, or do you think there is a more appropriate analogy?

Bitcoin is a form of energy.Its significant energy consumption is a long-term investment. Bitcoin miners protecting a large network is a positive development.

That is a very lovely way to say it. Amazing argument I'm gonna use it  :D :D

My usual argument is: We build a lot of empty houses / building just to store value, this speculation on houses partially is responsible to make them expansive for regular people. Building houses also waste a lot of energy, terrain and resource. We also waste time because we all need to be investor, we cannot just keep the money we are forced to gamble in the stock market etc.

Bitcoin energy consumption compared to that is a bargain.

In your analogy, it boils down to the point weather you see the legacy finance system on fire and BTC as the saviour. then BTC mininig and Blockchain hashing can very well use and transform into useless heat the TWh of a mid size country.. because it is worth it.. like the water for the firemen.

If however, you see BTC as a ridiculous playground for tax evaders and other illicit activity, a threat to the prevalence of the USD for intl. payments, a threat to law and order, a geeky speculative b.. then.. every drop of water is seen as waste.

It's really nice that you are thinking about the power bitcoin is consuming because that means that you also care for the environment and not just money and profit all alone. Regarding the analogy you just gave, I think it is somehow related and connected with each other. Bitcoin consumes power on a daily basis may it be in mining or what, it is consuming energy that is mostly non-renewable to make it function and continuously develop and grow. It is essential for bitcoin to consume power like in mining, otherwise, no bitcoin would be mined if they would stop the operations. Hence, the consuming process of energy is not put to waste. The same goes for the fire brigade which aims to wipe out fire into those areas that need help. It's just that they also consume a lot of water in the process of rescuing, but the water is not just sprayed and drizzled for nothing. It is done for a purpose the same way with bitcoin.

In the end I think its pointless to debate. If you do not understand why bitcoin is important, then any watt for the network however green it is, however small it is, it will be too much.

You can as well find this interesting:

The bitcoin mining network, energy and carbon impact (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5383881.0)

It is about how bitcoin mining contributes only 0.08% to global CO₂ production in 2021.

Bitcoin provides us with the strongest form of money available on the planet. It's decentralized ledger has a literal perfect track record against any and all attacks. While bugs have been discovered, none of them have resulted in stolen coins from other wallets.

If you think a network like that is worth the power consumption, than this solves the problem. The thing is..there are people who don't think bitcoins power consumption is worth it's utility. If you ask them why, they will surely not give you a reasonable response.

So essentially, this is all point of view. Some people view this level of power consumption to be acceptable, given that it is giving us the most secure money the world has ever seen. Others see this power consumption as an unnecessary waste by a current fad.

It's not about the power consumption, it's more about how the people choose to power their mining equipments, some of them might decide to use renewable sources of energy while the others might go for normal electrical energy coming from the government which would again be focused on the fact regarding how the particular government produces that energy as well. In some countries they have green energy supplied directly to the homes so a person can use mining softwares without any probelms. In some places people have immense potential to switch to any renewable source depending upon where they live so it's more of a lifestyle choice which is quite everywhere.

I wouldn't call it a good comparison. Firefighters save lives. Bitcoin is an alternative payment system. Fire brigades only use the resource during emergencies. Bitcoin uses electricity 24/7.

My argument is that Bitcoin's energy use is actually small when compared to other industries. And it's carbon footprint is even smaller. So let miners mine, as long as it's not causing problems to the local grid, in which case their energy consumption should be limited by the local authorities, which we see happen in some places.

Depends...

If you don't believe in bitcoin, you'd think it is a waste of electricity. Otherwise, you wouldn't think that. Either way, Bitcoin consumes as much electricity as a small country If I am not wrong and even though it sounds like a non-issue now, It will probably draw attention when the network gets even bigger. Energy is a hot topic lately too. Now the oil prices are climbing, some people will definitely use this as an excuse to fight crypto.

Whether or not you believe in bitcoin, it is obvious that bitcoin does not consume enough electricity to be actually a topic in the global energy consumption scene. The narrative that bitcoin is an energy threat is mostly spread by governments and those with a propaganda against it.

True, I personally feel also that because of the love we have for bitcoin, OP is being a little biased just as many others are, in recognising the power consumption concerns bitcoin mining is giving the energy professionals. If you like something, it is common practice to not want to see anything wrong or evil with it, you may even go out of your way to defend it when someone points out a flaw to it. This is not a proper approach, the proper approach should be looking for a way to resolve the energy concerns maybe by sourcing for an alternative and an independent source of power.

Bitcoin network consumes electricity to keep the network live. From a common man's view it is truly high electricity consumed. As said by few users the electricity consumption is very low considering the industries. Also its carbon footprints were low. The issue is with the miners, because six out of ten miners enroll get the license and operate. So, here it causes power shortage which affects the local community. In recent days this issue is much talked on Kazakhstan.