Bitcoin Forum

I am watching with concerns the development of climate change and global warming. While I believe that cryptocurrencies make only a small contribution, even many small things add up to a large number.

Bitcoin consumes a lot of power and I don't know if that can change. What do you guys think? As far as I understand, the trust in Bitcoin is mainly due to the proof of work mechanism. And with this, the high power consumption is probably inseparable?

I'm considering investing more in altcoins based on proof of stake or proof of personhood. What do you think are the advantages and disadvantages?

Bitcoin is decentralized so don't expect that it's algorithm might change to proof of stake like what ETH Devs are planning BTC will forever be a proof of work coin, if you are looking for some energy efficiency coins look into altcoins.

If you think that Bitcoin consumes lot of energy so it won't have a future as it had in the past, I bet you didn't know bitcoin miners are consuming less energy than energy need to power up a normal city in this world also many miners are working hard to bring the renewable energy sources to powerup their rigs so why no we help to bring renewable energy by giving subsidy or something than saying less decentralized is the good option for future.

Choosing the top altcoins can be difficult, as there are so numerous to elect from, although it's really worthwhile as these crypto coins can frequently give triple-digit returns!

1) Ethereum (ETH) – Exciting Altcoin to Hold Long Term
2) CRD Network (CRD) – Overall the Best Altcoin to Buy in 2022
3) Cardano (ADA) – Best Cryptocurrency with Exceptional Deve
4) Ripple (XRP) – Exciting Cryptocurrency with Huge Implicit
5) Stellar (XLM) – New Cryptocurrency with Fascinating Use Case

I will suggest Number 2 Crypto coin because CRD Network (CRD) is suitable to offer an accrued service of proof of reserves, financial history data, and off-chain financial transactions, which allows us to broadcast a single source of truth related to a single public key linked to a single KYC (Know Your Customer) record.

Know more information about CRD Coin - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5353836.msg57666515#msg57666515.

It has clearly stated if crypto was contributing very small amounts of pollution to the climate change. Some miners are also moving to use renewable energy
It's no more. You can try to see bunch of article if so many bitcoin miners have been moving to use the renewable energy and this means if the bitcoin mining creates less pollution that can also contribute to the global warming to that will trigger the climate change.

POS is good and this is consumes very small amounts of energy as you didn't even need to mine it. It was using staking method. POS has more advantage compared with POW but this less decentralized.

Which also makes its value decline over time.  If a person could have about 50 to 100 tokens per week by staking 100K of his POS tokens, he will just keep selling them.

I tried having some of these POS tokens myself and was already tempted when I just earn a few every week. For someone who earns thousands a day because they bought millions, it could just be easy money as long as the project continues. And the price as a result will also crash.

Most miner's primary concern is expenses. Power consumption is one of those factors that gives them headache which is why more and more miners go with renewable energy. Hydro, Geothermal and wind power are some of the choices and are not only economical but also lessens the effects of climate change when mining cryptos. Even though it might take long, If all miners choose renewable energy then we would certainly see more support with Bitcoin and other similar PoW cryptos towards their stand on climate change.
If you're keen on looking for cryptos that has less environmental impact now then go with either ADA, XLM, ALGO, SOL, even ETH with their planned PoS and all other PoS altcoins and tokens. I think that is one of the key advantages of PoS than PoW coins/altcoins, having less impact on the environment. Just simply fund and run your wallet and see your rewards pour in.

I don't see the advantages of mining bitcoin which is energy-intensive, it consumes a lot of electricity and is not environmentally friendly. Perhaps, mining from the POS concept does not use too much electricity is better, just run the node. I always pay attention to mining where it is said that there will be green energy for mining, but until now this has not happened.

Yes it is. But the topic denotes an idea on environment which we knew that proof of stake is much better than proof of work thats consume huge power.

For investment bitcoin is there but with regards to the topic I think this would debate but we all knew which one is environment friendly when it comes to that.

Interesting aspect that I haven't really thought about. It was already clear to me that cryptocurrencies sometimes consume a lot of energy, but I would not have bought a cryptocurrency because it needs a lot of energy.
Even if some miners use renewable energy, other households just don’t have that energy. Then there is less green energy available. This only shifts the problem. It could be a point that cryptocurrencies will be blamed even more in the future. If you look for negative aspects, you will find them. So it's definitely a target.
Which cryptocurrencies consume a lot of energy? Which less?
Would an eco-friendly coin be something to tempt you?
Which coins use Proof of Personhood? Does that need less energy?

you suggested 5 altcoins and out of 5 altcoins, you chose CRD for the reasons you have mentioned.
Of the 5 altcoins, why is there no BNB's name included in the recommended altcoins? In my opinion, BNB can be used as a long-term investment or a short-term investment.

I can't say a lot about advantage and disadvantage POS over POW caused by both have different characteristics. Talking about POS coin and coin based on POS consensus was so good in term of energy efficient, passive reward for the holders and even scalable blockchain that some POS blockchains already implemented. I have been also earning passively from staking my pos coin to help the network. This consensus is so good and it's like the coin that already issued or used in the blockchain become very useful as it can also give benefit to the passive holders like me who prefer to hodl my token rather than actively using it to trade.
Solanam, ATOM and all of POS coins are very good coins at this moment to invest. I have very good experience with POS coins.

If you're an investor, it's not a concern that you have to address about the power consumption of mining bitcoin. Let all the work be done by the miners as they're mostly big time miners that have a renewable power source and heavily invested in that equipment like solar panels and other machinery that will recycle energy.

As you invest in altcoins that are PoS.

Before you look into any other altcoins, look into Ethereum. It's still PoW but it will become PoS soon.

Bitcoin is an unique solution. There are lot of trust and value associated with this low volume crypto currency.
Theoretically it maybe possible to change bitcoins proof of work mechanism but it would certainly make bitcoin controversial. Bitcoin has always resisted large changes and even with small changes from volunteer developers, it has stood the test of time. As all of other energy intensive coins are moving towards greener option, I guess the world would be fine with mining bitcoin.

Op don't based on what's the consumption of bitcoin when it comes mining because that's not how it works although it can affect the price in the market because of some factors but that's not enough reason to underestimate bitcoin.

infact despite of declined of such activities bitcoin still  gaining more attention based on its price in the market unlike altcoins...

So i don't think it's a good idea to choose altcoins than bitcoin because of such reason..

The transition already happened and i rarely seen the new coin introduced in the market that used the POW consensus and almost majority of new coin and token are using the POS consensus caused by the new developers know this so well if the POS consensus will become the most efficient consensus to be running into the blockchain that will be consume less energy compared with the POW blockchain.
I have some POS coins in my wallet and so far so good. Remember even elon was complaining about POW consensus that was wasting energy to keep it being decentralized,

Yes, that's exactly my plan and that' s why I asked my question at this place in the board.

Globally, of course, energy consumption by Bitcoin does not account for very much. However, Bitcoin probably consumes as much electricity per year as a quarter of Germany's electricity consumption. I think that's not a small amount.

I think it's good that there is an increasing focus on renewable energies. However, there is not enough renewable energy for the whole world. What is used for Bitcoin is then lacking in another place, isn't it?

I think that at the moment it is important to save as much energy as possible. But I can understand if other people have different views.

And in the EU, a ban on POW cryptocurrencies seems to be on the agenda.... Even though I don't think that will be realized.

What would you say are the benefits of POS?

Thank you, I will do it that way. I believe that over time people will move towards more sustainability. The only question is how long that will take.

So far, I have only had my own experience with Idena. But there are also other cryptocurrencies that are based on Proof of Personhood. If you are wondering about the energy consumption, just read about the similarities and differences between POW, POS and POP.

Yes, I know. But the process also seems to be delayed. Perhaps it is more difficult than expected?

Bitcoin is very important right now, but it will be replaced by other projects in the future. Energy-related problems are temporary and cannot determine the fate of cryptocurrencies. If you trust cryptocurrencies, don't worry about energy  :)

Then there's Ethereum for you which is starting their way to POS.
Advantages. Just like you said. Energy. If you are the type of persons that is concerned about energy saving then you can always choose different type of consensus mechanism.
Disadvantages. Staking is kind of a long term investment if you ask me and it mostly relies to the amount of coins that you have to see the difference of what you will make. But, you will have peace of mind knowing you didn't support a high energy cost project.

If you are using solar power to mine Bitcoin, does your concerns go down regarding the high power consumption  ::). Majority of the mining farms might migrate to solar energy in the future and you cannot blame Bitcoin mining as the reason for the climate change and global pollution.


If you are considering in investing in POS where a few will have majority stake then it is your choice, the POS mechanism always attract big investors with big funds and they control everything but i like the decentralized way rather than investing in staking ones for the long run.

The only solution to energy-consuming cryptocurrencies is POS currency obviously. But the proof of stake comes with its own set of big disadvantages, as for a person who enters staking late at a higher price, he will never be able to compete with the person who started early. There always will be a big difference between both of them. Same is not the case in POW currencies as no matter how late you enter, if you enter with the same capital you get same rewards as the equipment decides who gets more reward and not the number of coins you hold. A good substitute was the Chia blockchain which didn't use power but used HDD space, but it too faced the problem of limitation of space in a normal SSD & that SSDs used to get damaged pretty easily, so failed completely as a project, we do have Nano which offers something different than the rest but so far don't see it becoming competition to Bitcoin, but that I see is the only contendor.

POS is not the only solution, the defi world does staking for you and yet you do not have to keep your PC open, there are so many different methods, masternodes and other methods where it is open but on a very simple PC that you could rent for cheap for example.

All in all, everything is better than the currently high energy mining system but that is not undesirable neither. Look at how much everything spends on energy, even tesla is seen as "cleaner solution" and yet spends energy, same electricity that miners use, why is one called clean and other is trash? I have to say as long as we do not go to more clean versions where no electricity or tiny amount is spent, we can't really call any other method clean just yet in ANY sector, not just crypto.

My question isn't about the type of PC, it's about the amount you are putting to Stake, let's say you are going to stake solana which definitely looks like the most promising currency of the future. Now you might have staked it in with $10000 when price was just 1$ per sol which means you have 10000 SOL of stake in the pool, but while I bought it when it was 100 so I just have 100 SOL which will carry 100 times less stake than your Stake even though we staked similar amount. Now if price of currency becomes this high obviously it's only the early adopters who make money in case of POS.

Do you have a human status?
How long have you been a member?



Could POW & POS be made more environmentally friendly or are there simply natural limits because of the technology?

I think that it's not a bad idea.

The media definitely exaggerates the environmental effects of PoW coins, especially bitcoin, just because it is extremely topical.

However, I do think that in the long run we are going to move towards more efficient protocols that consume less energy and are faster in general. Fantom is a good example of this, and I'm currently in the process of rotating into that L1 chain as the price has dipped significantly.

It's not quite that simple, I think. Energy is a limited resource and energy consumption is likely to play a role for some time to come. Of course, solar energy can be used for PoW. But at the moment we have the situation worldwide that there is not enough green energy yet. So if green energy is used for PoW, this energy is missing elsewhere. This will probably not be the case forever. But at the moment I see that as a problem.

The thing is, I think PoS is a better solution than PoW in many ways right now. But I see it like you do. PoS is not perfect either and has a few disadvantages.

Yes, that's one of the problems I see with PoS. Early investors or wealthy investors who hold a large portion of the coins can, in the worst case, decide about the network and exclude participants or transactions. Also, the consensus rules could be changed by such investors, right?

I do not have the human status yet. I only came across Idena at the beginning of the year when I started to get more involved with energy efficient cryptocurrencies. At first, I just read a bit about it until I started participating in the validations. Unfortunately, it didn't work out for me for a week because I had an important appointment at the time. But if you can't be there occasionally, it doesn't really matter.

I don't think PoP is 100% perfect yet. But the community is developing the project together. And each participant has only one vote, which counts the same for everyone.

I also think that the development will go in this direction. Sometimes the path will lead to dead ends or will have to be optimized, but I also think that the development will generally go in the direction of sustainability.

That may be true. Nevertheless, the energy consumption is there. If saving energy is important, you can very quickly live without cryptocurrencies. The more priority given to energy consumption, the more it comes into focus. That's a big criticism. The question is: when will energy conservation become a serious requirement for cryptocurrencies? Has the point already come, is it imminent or will it take a long time to get to this point?


We'll see where the proof of personhood protocol goes. It's certainly a good step if you can save more energy and it's also more democratic.
More people would have to think about the energy consumption of cryptocurrencies, maybe there would be more changes. You can change the protocol. That wouldn't be the problem.

The issue of global warming from cryptocurrencies is unproven, if there are findings of global warming from cryptocurrencies I'm sure the contribution is no more than 1%, haters are always looking for reasons to make FUDs and the government stop cryptocurrencies and this is actually a positive campaign from newcomers to learn and invest in cryptocurrencies.

What are the requirements and regulations for cryptocurrencies is already not the same everywhere in the world. And I don't believe that there will be a globally uniform solution in the future. The EU Parliament recently discussed a ban on proof of work, but then decided against it. This time. But I wouldn't want to rule out the possibility that in the future there could be specifications for the power consumption of cryptocurrencies in the EU, for example.

I also believe that there is no evidence of how high the percentage of cryptos in climate change is. The global climate is incredibly complex and has so many variables that it is impossible to say exactly what is having what effect now. But there's no question that the climate is changing, is there? And also that the effects of climate change will not be particularly pretty. That's enough for me to try to live more sustainably. But it's okay for me if other people see it differently.

I believe Proof of Personhood is attractive not only because of its energy efficiency, but also because each participant's vote counts equally. So you don't have to be a member of a mining pool or hold a large share of coins to participate profitably.

That may be true. But it is very easy to criticize cryptocurrencies for this. Many positive aspects are pushed into the background. You shouldn't expose yourself to that. Therefore, one should try to solve this problem as soon as possible. You don't have to make it easy for the haters.

But if the image is conveyed, you have a problem. So you shouldn't just say it's not like that. Instead, you should reduce energy consumption. Then you can show something and counter the criticism.

This is another aspect that should certainly appeal to some people. If you already have certain disadvantages in the real world, you shouldn't have any disadvantages in the digital world. This system should not even be allowed to emerge in the digital world.

I would also like the virtual world to be fairer than real life. But I think some developments are pretty similar. Unlike conventional currencies, cryptocurrencies wanted or still want to be decentralized. The power should not be in the hands of a few. Nevertheless, it is now the case, especially with popular cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, that large, organized mining pools have much more influence and benefits than individuals. This is not entirely different from the general distribution of wealth and power.

The fact that every vote in the community counts equally is something I think is better with cryptocurrencies like Idena, which are based on proof of personhood. But that requires a crypto identity that really ensures that each account can only belong to a single, real person. Getting such a crypto identity takes some effort. But in return, every participant has the same chances to receive rewards and to have a say in the game.

I agree, that means there are Various factors like capacity, cost, stability and functionality making it a very attractive investment and Eco-friendly tokens and cost savings are the key to being one of the most popular cryptos on the market today.

Completing four validations of about 30 minutes is not a big effort in my opinion. Then you have proven that you are human. You would have probably already after the first test, but there should be a certain hurdle for access. You also want to bind people to the validation. People have to take part in the validation, that's what the project thrives on.

I'm not saying it's a big effort. But it is an effort. But I think it's worth it to be a part of the community and to be able to mine. You don't have to participate in the validations to be able to buy IDNA. Apart from the validations, I think that the groups on Telegram and so on also contribute to a good sense of community.

There is a lot going on in the crypto market at the moment. Let's see what will change in the future. I think that maybe some of the more popular cryptocurrencies will crash, while some previously undervalued cryptocurrencies will probably get the chance to develop their potential. And I think, as I said, like you, that green and energy-efficient cryptocurrencies that maybe even enable sharding will have advantages.

I've used Peercoin which is a fork of Bitcoin but with pos for securing the chain and pow for distribution. I find it pretty neat. It has a small chain of just about a GiB in size and require very little in terms of compute resources. Unlike Bitcoin Peercoin have no hard cap on its supply instead burning transaction fees and rewarding stalking with minting new coins. This solves the problem of what will happen when bitcoin won't issue an reward anymore while preventing overuse of transactions due to deflation. Controll of the network lies with it's holders unlike in Bitcoin where owners of large mining farms decide what proposals should be accepted.

It was a fair non cash grab kind of a coin announced ahead of time giving everyone an equal chance to be first on the chain. No initial coin offerings or other marketing hype to pump the price to the moon. It lives a quiet life nowdays since there isn't much to say about it. It can do everything bitcoin can do and has less flaws. Unfortunately for Peercoin Bitcoin flaws are non-critical and do not matter to most users. Being first gives Bitcoin powerful legitimacy and network effects which clones can't match. Fortunately for me I hold both so it's not a big deal but it's a shame when good projects fail to bring adoption.

Peercoin still got active development though so it's not dead yet. I find it enjoyable to hold and be able to play with.

ADA was my favourite crypto currency,which give huge strength to the investors.It give us good profit at all the stages of the pump.We never fear or worry about the current price of the ADA.Surely all this will recover to the good potential.When the people had their strong holding the ADA,it was assured to get enough profit from their investments in longer period.

It's interesting to be able to participate in a project at such an early stage. Then you see all the developments. And especially with Idena you have a say. you decide with all the other participants how the project will develop. just last week an innovation was introduced after the community voted for it. My goal is to collect as much IDNA as possible with the validation. Then we'll see what comes of it, if the price goes up, that's great. If not, at least you've seen how it works in such early stages. In the Community you always get all the information and of course exchange ideas. I think that's also important to know where the journey should go. Otherwise you wouldn't really be able to understand all the votes.

I saw a statistic a few months back that said that bitcoin mining consumed more electricity than the whole country of Ukraine and this was before the war in the Ukraine started of course. Given the fact that Ukraine is a pretty big country with a population of more than 40 million people i was really surprised about this fact and this is definitely something that is not good for the public opinion about Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies in general. I think that a proof of stake mechanism can be or even is already just as safe as a proof of work mechanism like bitcoin has it because there big mining companies also have a lot of power of the network.

Over the last years Bitcoin mining seems to be very energy consuming and not that efficient. Several countries are already suffering from problems with electicity power because of blocks calculation power extensive usage.

It's hard to put this together in a way that doesn't sound conspiratorial, but I'll try anyway. It's up to you to DYOR. There is an obvious climate agenda that is promoted by major government and non-government organizations as well as non-profit action groups. Whether you believe in climate change or not, or whether it is man made, there are groups working to limit carbon emissions and something known as "carbon credits" now exists in two fields, regulated and non-regulated credits. Currently, some governments may require carbon emitters to purchase official carbon credits to offset their emissions but there is no global tax/standard on carbon emissions credits *yet. Blockchain technology is considered the "fourth industrial revolution" and coincides with some of the agendas promoted by the WEF and others. So it makes sense that popular blockchains are promoting themselves as carbon neutral or negative. Unfortunately, there are some groups that act to certify lands for carbon credits but the dark secret behind it is that these groups do not own the lands and they are unable to protect them in any way. I could create a project and sell carbon credits for 20 million hectares of trees in Guyana to a blockchain right now and get rich. It's all a scam until the UN creates a global carbon tax and carbon credit standard and regulates these credits. There are groups currently pushing BTC to go POS but it's unlikely that the majority of miners, which are in China and Russia, will play along so BTC might end up being forked again. That said, carbon neutral blockchains appear to be doing well because they are associated/partnered with large organizations like the WEF and others, so it makes sense to invest in projects like Celo, XRP, and CNDL that are involved in creating the new carbon credit blockchain standards.

Climate change has been used as a scapegoat to defame a number of things, whatever you might believe, other power sources are not that "green" as we think them to be. The carbon footprint of cars and vehicles are way more than what bitcoin mining produces. Hence this topic has been debunked a number of times, but it keeps coming back.

The power consumed in mining would be much higher with a banking and the rest of the transactions in the world. There are so many graphs from legitimate sources available on the internet to prove this.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/new-research-bitcoins-carbon-footprint-lower-than-previously-thought

Bullshit, PoW is the only thing that investors should put money in. Just because PoS does not use energy to that extent as PoW, does not mean it is profitable and neither is it good for the long term in your portfolio.

Dont think about what carbon footprint you are ending up generating. It is an inevitable process that you cannot stop so stop bothering about it.

I don't think it's that easy to say what exactly investors should put their money into. The world has been and is currently being shaken by a number of crises. And crises often lead to change. I don't know what the situation is with energy prices in the countries where you live. But in our country, the prices for heating and electricity are rising very sharply at the moment. This is forcing a lot of people to save energy, whether they want to or not. That probably won't affect miners in China or Russia much. But I don't think it's fair if not everyone has the same opportunities to participate.

This is exactly what I see as the problem with Proof of Work Blockchains. Individual miners, especially if they live in countries with expensive energy prices, are disadvantaged. Personally, I think that wealth and power should be distributed more fairly than is currently the case globally.

I also have a broad portfolio and look forward to what the future holds. However, like you, I would be happy to see previously undervalued cryptocurrencies, whose potential I believe in, increase in value and importance!

I also invested quite a bit in Cardano last year and hold my coins. I don't believe in selling out of panic. But I personally only invest money in cryptocurrencies that I don't need immediately. So I can wait reasonably calmly to see how the prices develop. And I am also confident that they will recover sooner or later.

I also find this idea of high energy consumption frightening. But I can understand when other people come to different conclusions. Ultimately, everyone has to make the investment decisions that they think are right and promising.

I think energy-efficient cryptocurrencies are just opinion or talk. So far what they say green energy has never been one that they have managed to just dissipate. In fact, in some time I have never seen a project that develops green energy or environmentally friendly energy for cryptocurrencies. The fact is that cryptocurrencies that are environmentally friendly and energy efficient have not yet been discovered.

But it shows that the problem has been recognized. Even if you only talk about it, it brings a lot. At some point, the point comes where just talking is no longer enough and action must follow. Without talking about it, it does not come to this point.
Why should you develop green energy only for cryptocurrencies?
The problem is the high energy consumption and the environmental damage caused by the production of the energy. Who consumes the energy is beside the point - the energy is consumed. Cryptocurrencies are just a consumer here. From my point of view, not an important one. That is why it is even more important to save energy here otherwise the energy consumption does not justify the benefit of cryptocurrencies. If I want further development of cryptocurrencies, these problems must be rectified.
With Idena, it is an attempt to reign on these problems. It consumes less energy. Is decentralized and more democratic because each person has a voice.
If we focus purely on energy consumption, why don't you see Idena as an improvement?

Of course, there are no cryptocurrencies that do not consume energy. But there are blockchains that consume more energy. And others that are more energy efficient. Everyone has to research the different advantages and disadvantages for themselves and then draw their own conclusions.

No one has to buy cryptocurrencies. And the buying decisions change the prices and the supply. I'm optimistic that demand will take care of that in the long run. And cryptocurrencies, which I believe can be the next big thing because they have the potential to be a gamechanger, also have a strong community that continues to develop and improve the project. As a result, there are also no perfect cryptocurrencies. But there are those that are constantly improving. And more is simply not possible.

Thank you for all the opinions and views that have been gathered here!