Bitcoin Forum

Just as people moved from gasoline powered cars to electric will investors also move from bitcoin to ecofriendly alts?

My guess that it's the good-sized miners that are likely to move to eco-friendly energy; maybe due to regulations, or simply to maximize profits.

Sure, some people will move to PoS alts; but nothing's going to beat Bitcoin in terms of security, decentralization, monetary policy, and adoption. simply not a single alt comes close to Bitcoin in terms of these characteristics.

I don't think the energy consumption will become the reason of Bitcoin's downfall in long run. What is happening now is an impact due to Elon's comments on bitcoin. Elon is a manufacturer of electric cars which is environment friendly. So his announcement of accepting bitcoins for Tesla cars actually angered a lot of shareholders and environmentalists. Since Tesla is a publicly traded company, Elon had to safeguard its reputation.

But I am sure it is a temporary impact and we will soon be back to track. But for sure, new miners may choose pos coins over pow coins because it is easier to get into and also requires less investment in most cases. Also bitcoin miners will slowly choose to move to eco-friendly energy sources as it keeps the operating cost lower.

Not a downfall. Just a temporary impact!

This argument is difficult to make. It is already known that Bitcoin has huge electricity consumption. I don't think that PoW will change in Bitcoin, but I know for a fact that funds do not want to invest in anything that is polluting the environment.
But can we say that Bitcoin does that and is it worth this consumption? The network is getting better security, but even at 80% of the current hash-rate the network was already secure.
However I don't like these fake arguments made at all.
This is not about protecting the environment it is all a game of manipulation. Suddenly Tesla and Square are all eco-friendly out of nowhere.
When they were investing in Bitcoin they knew of course.

BTC is king, what I am thinking is the growth is now limited with it being a store of value with high energy demand. With many options becoming available with less carbon footprint the store of value will be trickling to the likes of ADA NANO and Harmony 

And the energy usage will increase, and so will Bitcoin's security and decentralization.

A huge factor of Bitcoin being a SoV is that it's actually decentralized; whereas, these altcoins simply doesn't have that characteristic. I wouldn't want a huge chunk of my net worth parked in an asset where the protocol is pretty much controlled by a CEO-like figure. Also, using proof of stake for a SoV asset? I couldn't name a worse combination.

Nothing fake about it, just as it was a fact tree huggers and I was one of them knew of and have been following Tesla ( the company) since the roadster came out in 2009. 
It was nothing but a couple of cars and an idea for ecofriendly transportation. Eleven years later they are bigger than Ford and GM combined. 

What I am wondering is if mining BTC can be changed in the future to POS ?  and or if its possible to evolve to less energy demanding coin.

The fact is : people will move to whatever is beneficial for them.
There are other things also which are not at all energy efficient but are still being used since years by these investors.
•The energy usage can only be decreased if people who are in charge of the mining farms take alternative sources of energy as a main source
•They need to study about renewable sources of energy and they have to be guided in the right direction through these big investors
•Other Altcoins are not going to be Invested in by bulk people for sure therefore the price will never pump up as compared to bitcoins
•People would not leave this opportunity to buy more during this dip.
They are just trying to figure out a way to make other people dump BTC so that they can buy at lower rates.

Bitcoin IS proof of work, and it is very successful in the SoV aspect because of PoW. Changing Bitcoin into PoS is just going to create problems. Do you want to give exchanges huge amounts of power over the network? I sure as hell wouldn't. Remember Changpeng Zhao's past plans on rolling back the network due to the people hacked on Binance? Yea, that might've occurred if Bitcoin was PoS.

Not to mention changing to PoS is just forking it into another crappy altcoin.

A huge factor of Bitcoin being a SoV is that it's actually decentralized; whereas, these altcoins simply doesn't have that characteristic. I wouldn't want a huge chunk of my net worth parked in an asset where the protocol is pretty much controlled by a CEO-like figure. Also, using proof of stake for a SoV asset? I couldn't name a worse combination.
[/quote]

You make a good point !  Its become like investing in stocks you just don't want all your eggs in one basket...  Cryptos are just one of our baskets... I appreciate all the comments guys !

Bitcoin is eco friendly.  Those saying otherwise are uninformed or intentionally obtuse.


No.

Bitcoin is POW. It is. It always has been. It was the intention from the beginning. It always will be.  Get over it.

If you don't like it, there are thousands of shitcoins for you to choose from.

Before when mining rigs and mining jobs were too popular and BTC just started to have its popularity , many aims to buy and create their own crypto mining but later on finds it unprofitable due to high cost of electricity, those only who can maintain their consumption or have alternatives like solar panels can fully earn in these mining business but since adoption increases in crypto its quite impossible for its price tofall just because of energy consumption since there are already miners who set their mind in doing it.

The fact that both stocks (Tesla and Squre) are down since they announced their BTC investment means their sudden concerns responsibility towards the environment is fake. Jack knew and Elon knew. The difference is there are hundreds of billions lost, for a billion dollar investment in BTC. Both just want to save their stock price.

About your question, I already replied, PoW works like that and Bitcoin is not going to change. Each country has environment laws. If a mining farm in a third world country burns too much coal, it is probably because that country has a corrupt government accepting industries run with high pollution levels.

no because the bitcoin's energy consumption is greatly exaggerated to the point that it is starting to look ridiculous. also when you compare the energy consumption that bitcoin has with anything else in the world you realize that it is really tiny in comparison.

these days i'm posting this video everywhere:
Bitcoin energy consumption by Andereas Antanopolos
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvFqEofdAZ0

First you are wrong, energy is my business. Some BTC is mined from hydro power solar power etc but the vast majority comes right off the grid worldwide. That means fossil fuel plants make up the bulk of the load.

You skipped right over the question, I know BTC is POW and always has been. What I can tell you is its topped out now unless the POW evolves into less energy demand I see it going back to $10k... so you may just have to get over that. 

Downfall? Can someone please remind me how many times Bitcoin died so far because of various fud and bad news?
We should not blindly listen and trust mainstream media and clowns like Elon Musk who is probably spending more energy on his posts and space rockets than all Bitcoin network.

Bitcoin will never convert to PoS model and if some crazy minority decides to fork off it will end up like all other Bitcoin forks that tried to do something similar.
Proof-of-stake has many flaws, there is no real decentralization with vps servers and imagine telling people to buy Bitcoin if you want to run a node with current prices or higher.
What could happen in future is that someone invents new eco friendly algorithm that is not PoS or PoW but something totally new that keeps security and decentralization.
I am sure we are going to see more Bitcoin changes in future and I would like to see improved privacy more than changing of PoW model.

You must be Nostradamus or some prophet if you know exact price movement, and Bitcoin may go down to $10k at some point but it can also go to $100K when this fud settles.
Check out stock-to-flow model and zoom out.

Please name such "green" alternatives? What coin is mined out of thin air? In my opinion, this is the opinion that the mining of cryptocurrency can become "environmentally" clean, just a gimmick like the whole topic of "green energy". Since in the global energy generation "green technologies" occupy a negligible percentage - so it is the same with the mining of bitcoins and alternative coins. This is a utopia which in the near future is not destined to come true in reality.

Elon just mentioned something I had been talking about a couple years now so its always been in the back of my mind. He just gets a lot of reaction lol

I am not a BTC hater, I am an investor.  I road the train from $380 and love bitcoin.  Now it has its competition, I watch the crypto market cap a lot. I believe it peaked at $2.7T just a few weeks back with BTC in control of 1.2T or better.  Currently at this writing the total market cap is $2.06 T with BTC holding $800B of that, ETH $373B. So $640B has left the crypto market. I can easily see a $3T market as money comes back in this year but how much is going to be going into the likes of ADA now that Elon caused a mini panic.

Its all speculative and as Ive always told investors it doesn't matter if its true or not, what matters is how people react to it.

ADA, Bitgreen BITG, XCH, Nano and XLM. Its not that these coins don't use power its the amount they use that's attractive to some and may become a factor for investors.

Glad to hear it.  Then tell me please, what is the total worldwide energy expenditure right now behind the worlds leading alternative system (U.S. Dollars)?
Please include ALL energy that would stop being used if the Dollar (or other fiat currencies) didn't exist. Include the minting of the physical currency, the securing and transporting of that physical currency, the secret service effort to prevent counterfeiting and fraud, the banking system, vaults, branches, ATMs, tellers, all the fuel spent on all the vehicles by all the employees getting to and from work, all the databases and computers for storing balances all over the world, the networks needed for inter-bank transfers, the consumer level electronic payment systems, card readers, routers, security systems, etc.  While you're at it, please consider the amount of energy the U.S. military uses in its efforts to make sure that its currency keeps its status as the reserve currency of the world.

Once you've calculated all that, come back and compare it for me to the costs of Bitcoin's network.


Bitcoin mining is driven by profits.  If you want mining to use more eco-friendly sources of energy, make them cheaper.  As eco friendly electricity becomes cheaper, bitcoin mining will automatically switch over to more eco-friendly sources.


Heard this at $1, $10, $100, $1000, and now $10,000.  Picking an arbitrary number close to the current number on any given day and saying it "topped out" at that number is just silly.  $10,000 is no more of a magic number than $1000 or $100,000.

Furthermore, let's imagine for a moment that you are correct. That would be a GOOD thing.  Once price discovery ends, volatility dies down, and the exchange rate
stabilizes, it will be MUCH easier for merchants to price things in bitcoins and for consumers to understand what that price means in terms of value.  An eventual stabilized exchange rate that adjusts over time due mostly to deflation is the end goal.


Nothing to get over.  I'd be thrilled that the price stabilized and Bitcoin's volatility stops being a common complaint.  It doesn't change the fact that Bitcoin mining can not and will not be changed away from Proof of Work.

I remember reading the other day that the Visa/Mastercard type payment networks collectively use only 20% of the energy consumption by Bitcoin. They are also engaged in exponentially more transactions every day - tens of millions. The fees associated with Bitcoin tend to cost more than comparative credit/debit card networks and ironically the time that people want to liquidate holdings (a stampede to the exit) can take a hefty chunk from a small scale "investor" due to fluctuating costs. At that point, the main positive working for bitcoin is the anonymity factor - which is slowly being diminished as retail or institutional investors gravitate towards fewer exchanges. Governments only like a certain amount of anonymity when it comes to the money supply, because too much can be abused by criminal actors, so this might lead to future regulatory crackdowns. It's getting harder to paint a hopeful future for Bitcoin, but as you say - others might be able to at least be more "green".

No more so than electricity consumption has been the downfall of banks, investment banks, gold mines, and any other financial system.

Imagine how much electricity is used in all of the banks globally? Even if we simply account for clearing and settlement. Bitcoin bypasses so many arcane processes. In an apples-to-apples comparison, I'm certain Bitcoin beats the banks by many a KWh!

I'm going to puke with all these threads discussing the fricking environmental problem that bitcoin might cause.
It's a free market, anyone can buy all the electricity available to do whatever they think it's best. The real problem, and we know it, is that the whole world still runs on fossils.
In a million years the Sun is gonna die and it's gonna kill us all anyway.

Elon (A Shitcoin shiller) Musk is shilling with meme coin and making FUD with Bitcoin. Not that coal energy is being used in mining these days, even before he was invested in Bitcoin, fossil fuel was used for mining. I believe that Bitcoin is more Eco-Friendly than his SpaceX & Starlink.
Only new investors are the main victim of Elon's FUD, that's why panic selling is ongoing but Pro trader & hodlers are taking the opportunities to buy at deep.

great comments from you all, let my try to answer some... On the WW use of power its not a an engineering banter on the dynamics of BTC power consumption. Its about what the investor will buy.

This whole conversation is about demand. I want to see BTC become much more stable myself but at this time we see how vulnerable all crypto's are to comments and social media running with fear and or hype. When I say I think its topped out at $60k IMO it has unless something changes in the crypto world that causes a huge demand just in BTC.  Like I say I watch BTC market cap closely ( its share of all crypto value). ETH recently made a huge jump in that market share. Doge came in and showed what a shit coin can do from hype sucking up $70B.  So as money trickles back into crypto's and lets say we hit $3T in the coming months it will be interesting to see what % BTC has captured.       

right ! Some not all, when they have a choice of BTC or NANO etc will use the more greenwise coin. They are out there, just like the Apple followers that wont touch a damn Android if it half the price lol. If we would just go to Thorium based reactors (SMR's) to power 75% of the grid we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Coal fired plants have the highest mortality rate to Kilowatt output than all other power producers combined. Nuclear and Hydro have the lowest by far.

Yeh those regulations have a chunk of my money tide up in a Japan Liquid account. I most likely will never see again unless the regulations change again.

So Bitcoin is going back down to $10k because of the increasing energy usage? That doesn't make sense at all. If anything, the increasing hashrate actually means that there's actual demand. And yet it will crash back down to $10k because of it?

Might as well use PayPal tbh.

Consider this...

The amount of energy that is used Globally for bitcoin mining is DIRECTLY proportional to the product of the average exchange rate of bitcoins multiplied by the current block reward.

If the exchange rate goes up, the miners have more money per block mined to pay for more electricity.  If the block reward goes up, the miners have more money per block mined to pay for more electricity.  If the block reward goes down, the miners have less money per block mined to pay for electricity. If the exchange rate goes down, the miners have less money per block mined to pay for electricity.

Furthermore, approximately every 4 years, the block subsidy is cut in half.  It is currently 6.25 BTC per block, but in a few short years, it will be only 3.125 BTC per block and 4 years after that, it will be 1.5625 BTC per block.

If nothing else changes (the exchange rate stays pretty much the same, and the transaction fees per block stay pretty much the same, and the cost of electricity per kWh stays pretty much the same, and the ASIC efficiency stays pretty much the same), then we should see the amount of energy used for mining cut in half in a few years, and cut in half again 4 years after that.  So, by design, Bitcoin WILL become more efficient over time.

Now, if the exchange rate increases, the energy usage will increase proportionally, but from what you're saying that isn't a concern.

yes I understand all that and appreciate the replies, I am not a novice btw I have been buying, trading and investing in BTC and Alts for years.  I just think the new money coming into the cryptocurrency world will be heavier to the Alts than the past and of that more going to greener currencies.  Could be 100% wrong but that's what I am thinking moving forward as an investor.

yet even if some will turn to Eco friendly coins yet the assurance of their funds will always be for Bitcoin so in chances that alt to be the main won't happen at any cost.

Downfall will never come for Bitcoin , that will never happen in the next 5-10 years.

The problem of energy consumption will not make Bitcoin downfall, because the trust in Bitcoin is already very strong. Even if ecofriendly alts appear,
it is still impossible to make Bitcoin replaceable. Because Bitcoin is too strong, many altcoins created to replace Bitcoin have failed. I think at least for
the next 5-10 years Bitcoin is still the best and will not be replaced by any coins. So now it is very safe to choose Bitcoin as a long-term investment.

Yep,

but bitcoiners don't want to hear that.
Bitcoiners want to hear that bitcoin energy waste is divine, and that bitcoin should get 1st access to the energy grid,
even if poor people freeze due to increased energy prices or people get sick from air pollution from burning excessive amounts of coal.

Bitcoiners are going to make every excuse in the book, look at everyone else they use more power than BTC, they cause more pollution than BTC. Bitcoiners problem is this , those other industries are regulated already, and those other industries are distributed enough that their drain on the energy grids are manageable.

What bitcoin miners do is within a short time frame increase the strain on an energy grid almost to point of a new small country moving in, but instead of decades so the energy producers have time to ratchet up production, they increase the strain within 2-3 years.

Bitcoin PoW mining is completely unsustainable in it's current growth pattern.
But bitcoiners don't want to hear that.

So here is the question for Bitcoiners,
Since Bitcoiners refuse a switch to PoS, what are the plans, when the majority of civilized countries ban all bitcoin mining?
Do Bitcoiners have a hidden island where they can power all Bitcoin PoW mining with a volcano?
Are Bitcoiners hiding a new fusion device for free unlimited energy?

My guess is they don't have an answer for that either, just it won't happen because bitcoin is great.

IMO, What I see happening is that at some point most countries ban bitcoin due to concerns over it carbon footprint and energy waste.
At some point only poor countries running unstable energy grids will allow bitcoin miners, and then the bitcoin network itself becomes extremely unreliable, and this translates into a spiraling price decrease verses fiat, then even the most ardent bitcoiners, will begin to question why don't we move to PoS, I mean look at the PoS coins Cardano & Ethereum, which are now #1 & #2 on the Coin Market cap it worked great for them.

That is timeline, I see playing out, how long it takes to reach it depends on how fast the banning btc increases and how soon the major investors recognize PoS is the future and PoW is a failed tech.

But as I said , Bitcoiners don't want to hear any of that.   :)

No, I don't think energy consumption will bring down Bitcoin. Energy is necessary in all things. Fiat consumes more energy than Bitcoin. And most importantly, Bitcoin is now consuming much of its energy from renewable sources. Bitcoin is safe because it consumes the amount of energy it is currently consuming. Just like fiat with all its vaults and banks and other security measures.

All these talks of energy consumption have already been sufficiently responded to. Elon is ignorant. Elon is bringing up an old issue. The problem is that people are riding on it as if it is a new issue Bitcoin critics raise.

I don't think so energy consumption will be the downfall of bitcoin when the price of bitcoin goes down it goes up again. Not just for bitcoin but other things are falling and rising more and more over time bitcoin costs a lot of energy to use but long term investments can be very lucrative the fiat currency consumes energy but it is controlled by the government which falls and rises. Bitcoin will not go to altcoin the demand will increase as the days go by investors will not be disappointed wait for the price to rise again.

If we don't address the issue, I am sure that these problem on energy consumption is going to bore more problems in the future that is going to really cause the downfall of bitcoin market as we know it.

no

Energy consumption can not be the reason for bitcoin downfall. At lest, not in long and mid term. Regarding the consumption, according to many sources, the energy consumption of bitcoin mining is much lower than fiat energy consumption. Also, I believe time after time the bitcoin miners will need to use better devices and the solar panels to provide the energy instead of using fossil fuels, that's how the problem can be solved in long term. Generally, people who say bitcoin is consuming too much energy don't have enough information about it or maybe than have some other goals by saying such things.

I think some are missing my point... 

There are lots of consumers that Love the Hummer,  yet instead of buying the gas guzzling Hummer the conscious is more at ease with an Electric Truck.
Forget all the engineered logic as the world of average consumers doesn't operate on it. I also am not saying bitcoin wont be around if it continues on its way as is,
 only that it will lose market share and quite possibly not be King. 

What's left out of the equation when it comes to the traditional payment system is the technical overhead and all the logistics involved. You can't just say Bitcoin consumes electricity and this is how much, and the traditional banking system doesn't mine anything so it does not consume any electricity. I am pretty sure that a sharp analysis of all processes involved in finally making the payment in the supermarket happen with your cards, people would be surprised how much energy goes into those processes.

Sure some people indeed make such decisions with vehicles, but they're a huge minority. But take note that it's not really that much of a good analogy. Whether a certain miner uses renewable energy or not, it really won't affect the ability of the bitcoiner to use bitcoin. Whereas people who use EVs might be monetarily incentivized.

Bitcoin losing marketshare has always been a possibility and has been fluctuating a lot since forever(see: dominance metric). But Bitcoin not being king because of the energy usage? Lol no.

if you are like elon musk that cares for the environment you will soon find yourself moving from btc to alts .
 that can cause downfall in the price but btc price will remain high because most of the people will stay in btc just like the car users that are still loyal to thier old model vehicles and as we can see there are still lots of gasoline stations around .
 eco friendly models are less powerful and the same can go with cryptos . i dont like that but i want maximum performance

This analogy is, in my opinion, one of the best examples we can give of the Bitcoin and Altcoin market trends. That perhaps one day more digital currency investors will turn to Altcoins (due to lower fees) They go and the bitcoin market undergoes many changes.

Those minority of people made Tesla the largest automaker in the world in 10 years from a couple of roadsters.

It wont matter if energy is renewable or not, people will argue that energy could best be served elsewhere. Although a great idea the Achilles heal may well be the massive proof of work computations.   

For the last 12.5 years, tens of millions have been using Bitcoin without an issue. And a few months ago, a rich asshole enters the scene and create a lot of hype. And then he dictates that we should change the way Bitcoin works. I don't think that it is going to work like that. PoW has worked so well for the last 12 years and I really don't want any changes to the algorithm. Those who want PoS are free to migrate to any other coin, which they feel is more energy efficient. But I am not in favor of any changes, just because Elon doesn't like the current setup. 

If we can't do a thing about that energy consumption problem, pretty sure that it will be a downfall for bitcoin but given how there are still gas powered cars even though the first electric car was built in 1946, I don't think that we are going to see bitcoin's downfall in our lifetime.

Musk had nothing to do with my post, its something I've been thinking on for years actually.  All my crypto assets are in Alts the last couple of years. Just pondering the question of the pow network evolving to a POS network from folks that actually design the programs. So far it seems its a no

I dont think BTC will ever be gone jus may nit be king one day

At least Musk is responsible for the crash we are having for the last 2-3 days. The first PoS coin came in to circulation many years ago. If PoS was so much superior to PoW, then it could have overtaken Bitcoin and the other PoW coins already. That hasn't happened because PoS algorithm has a lot of vulnerabilities. It is a free market and no one is forcing others to use PoW coins. Now you can't just badmouth the PoW coins, because the PoS coins are not making much movement in the market.

I don't think Bitcoin mining energy consumption will be an issue anymore or the downfall of Bitcoin since there are already alternatives energy created to reduce the level of electricity energy consumption of Bitcoin though alternative has not circulated. However, we have some countries which energy consumption is not an issue there.

So shifting from Bitcoin to other altcoins which use less power to mine will provide you the same security and decentalized ecosystem?With change in technology the people also need to update and this is also used in bitcoin mining.The miners are already shifting to renewable source of energy to mine Bitcoin like wind and solar powers.You can check that banking and other sectors use 2-3x more energy consumption than Bitcoin mining as per the reports.But still there is no statements by the federal on that.Gold mining also create pollution in the air by digging in the ground risking the workers life and these Tesla and other electronic cars are also using lithium for batteries which are extracted from the ground and labours are exploited for such works.But still btc which is providing you freedom of funds is always targeted by the crits.So just ignore them in normal course and hold btc for future.

right, he and China upset the whole cart lol...    keep in mind I am not badmouthing I am making an observation and pondering questions from an investment point of view.
No one was more pro Crypto than I, they might be smarter though. I am not a software engineer but I am an investor. I know trends pretty well.  BTC could and may be the best
 crypto there has ever been and ever will be but if XYZ crypto triples my money in 3 years verses BTC at 100% where do you think my money will be.

Its very much like the stock market, a company can have all the boxes checked for a solid investment. Yet if no one is buying the stock its not going up. I am not investing in the integrity of the coin, I am investing in its potential.   

My answer here is no. Bitcoin will never be replaced by alternative coins/cryptocurrency just because of the energy consumption. Join the miners community and see how they are all planning to have their operations  have 90-95% renewable energy sourced. Not only because they could help the nature to breathe, they will also massively benefit to it as the energy expense will be reduced to almost 10% of what they are currently paying. I don't really think that Elon Musk did not know about this, I'm sure he does. The opinion he had on bitcoin is only a public stunt for me.

If this happen, expect for the bitcoin to accelerate, not even that it would also be more attractive to the investors and people who fears of missing out. We all need to have patience on it as development is being made from time to time now.

But honestly, I wouldn't mine too if we all had to move to alternative coins with less energy consumption and then wait for the Bitcoin to catch up. Well, it depends though but one thing is for sure, Bitcoin will never be at the bottom. We will always find ways to move up.
 

when the total reward in bitcoin of all transaction fees per day(currently around 300 btc), will be much hgher(x10+) than the total amount of bitcoin per day, made from each block(currently 900 btc), the consumption will not be a concern anymore, the number of transaction will be instead, for the miners at least...

Crypto does not consume as much electricity as many people think. Any production activity consumes much more.

Most of miners uses renewable energy, I see no reason making it as big problem as it seen or talked by elon, not to mention if bitcoin indeed fall then it's gonna solve its own problem which is energy consumption since there gonna be decrease in mining difficulty
and tbh, bitcoin is still developing and there's maybe a potential for it to release solution to this problem so rest assured the problem regarding energy consumption won't be bitcoin's down fall and frankly if we could find another source of energy in the future, does the current electricity consumption matters?

well lets hope it doesn't but here is something to think about, lets say BTC is 100% renewable energy from their own dedicated sources in the future.
You will still have a movement of users/consumers that will say why use BTC when I can Use XYZ coin and achieve the same transaction of digital currency
using 4 million times less power.  I mentioned earlier that the power Industry was my business for most my career (30 plus years) and I still do some consulting
for Southern Company. I still bogles my mind that we could completely end all the pollution problems and all the energy problems with Nuclear. Thorium based salt reactors.

However the public wont allow it from unwarranted fear of Nuclear power.  I also mentioned the Energy mortality rate per TKwhr and yet the public wont embrace Nuclear.
The point here has nothing to to with power and BTC. The point in this is public perception, and thats what can make a difference in the crypto world as much as it has in the power Industry world.

Energy Source                    Mortality Rate (deaths/trillionkWhr)

Coal – global average         100,000    (41% global electricity)

Coal – China                      170,000   (75% China’s electricity)

Coal – U.S.                         10,000    (32% U.S. electricity)

Oil                                     36,000    (33% of energy, 8% of electricity)

Natural Gas                          4,000    (22% global electricity)

Biofuel/Biomass                  24,000    (21% global energy)

Solar (rooftop)                        440    (< 1% global electricity)

Wind                                      150    (2% global electricity)

Hydro – global average          1,400    (16% global electricity)

Hydro – U.S.                               5    (6% U.S. electricity)

Nuclear – global average              90    (11%  global electricity w/Chern&Fukush)

Nuclear – U.S.                            0.1    (19% U.S. electricity)

It is notable that the U.S. death rates for coal are so much lower than for China, strictly a result of regulation, particularly the Clean Air Act (Scott et al., 2005). It is also notable that the Clean Air Act is one of the most life-saving pieces of legislation ever adopted by any country in history, along with the Fair Labor Standards Act (1938) which established the 40 hour week, and Medicare in 1965.  Still, about 10,000 die from coal use in the U.S. each year, and another thousand from natural gas.

https://www.power-technology.com/features/nuclear-mortality-rate-safe-energy/

- Society has quite a lot of industries with large energy consumption but society also accepts as long as it brings value to them, bitcoin only consumes energy at the allowable level and still brings value to the community, don't understand why some people always like to hype and try to trample bitcoin with this, especially some people have great resources to influence the market. And we are always surprised with the actions of this group of people, reject and hate but then buy and mine continuously, what are their goals and plots?

You can imagine the reaction from the energy consumption tweet from Elon Musk. It was as though it is a planned or an anticipated tweet as it took off immediately. The result was noticeable in less than 24hours!
Using other alts as a worthy replacement isn't the right way or a way to go around this. There was once a time when, bitcoin was mined with non sophisticated devices too. Projecting other alts would simply mean a bump to that coin and in time, another coin would step up. Thougjh, this is most likely not to happen as bitcoin faithfuls are always there to push price up.

We can rightly say bitcoin is only making use of the readily available at a good price too. Should the world switch to a more renewable or eco-friendly source, miners would too. Tesla was wrong in this one as per statistic assumption.

The good news is that in the U.S. the percentage of electricity that is generated from Coal has dropped below 20%.  As a matter of fact, I believe last year was  the first year where the percentage of electricity generated from renewables exceeded that of coal:

Source	Billion kWh	Share of total
Coal	774	19.3%
Renewables	792	19.8%

https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3

I don't know if the relationship is linear, but if so then perhaps the U.S. death rate for coal is now down to about 6,000?

When an industry that is not own or control by the government/business mogul is flourishing like crypto currency despite their strive to bring it down we should always expect many hate and false information from different angle that's the reason why some people hype minor issue about Bitcoin.
Their goals is simple to cause fud so they can buy dip or cause chaos in the market.

That would be great, yes the Combined cycle Gas Turbines have been springing up all over the last 10 years replacing many of the dinosaur coal plants. They just bulldozed down a 4 unit ( Plant Branch 1969) in Milledgeville GA  a few years back. The CCGT's are much cleaner and start up in a couple of minutes vs hours. There is still two monster coal fired plants in GA.  Plant Scherer in Juliette ( Largest coal power plant in the U.S. # 2 in power production)  and Bowen in Cartersville.  I was over a $85M environmental project there in 2016. Good to see the renewables climbed to 20%.. Solar farms are all over the south now. 20% is going to be about the top until battery tech catch's up.

anyway lemme run, I could talk about energy forever lol... I appreciated the comments from you all and remember I am not anti BTC :)    Just watching the world and trying to keep the investments I do have.

That's right! There are some alternative to be use it terms of electric energy so that energy consumption of bitcoin will not be a problem and it will not cause for bitcoins downfall. More than 10 years of existence and no issue about energy consumption of bitcoin, especially now that the development of technologies continues.

bitcoin is one of the leading coins in this market. this is one of the strongest coins in the market. and the number of investors is much higher than other altcoins. and people want to pay more attention to bitcoin than other altcoins. Therefore, I do not see the energy consumption of bitcoin as a reason to deter people. It may be possible that bitcoin's energy consumption is seen as a deterrent by bitcoin miners.

I don't think high energy consumption will lead to Bitcoin's downfall sometime in the future. After all, the energy spent is being put to good use (by ensuring Bitcoin remains secure against external attacks). The same way gasoline-powered cars are still relevant even with electric cars in play, the same will happen with Bitcoin and altcoins. The problem is not Bitcoin's consensus algorithm, but rather ASIC hardware itself. It's up to mining companies to develop new ASICs with improved energy-efficiency. I wouldn't worry about energy consumption as long as the Blockchain remains decentralized and censorship-resistant. Just my opinion :)

I believe you are spot on with that, the computations can still be difficult while the energy demand decreases 80% or so from improved miners.   

Can you show some stats or numbers about such transition of people from gasoline cars to electric ones?

These vehicles represent the 250 million cars, S.U.V.s, vans and pickup trucks on America’s roads today. The vast majority run on gasoline. Fewer than 1 percent are electric.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/03/10/climate/electric-vehicle-fleet-turnover.html

This is just a reasoning and just trying out to get bitcoins price to the floor. Energy consumptions issues? They should look on a bigger picture on which one
is consuming even more.

right but where did the money go?  This conversation is more about what the consumer can do when they form a movement, rather than crunching electricity numbers. All you have to do is look as TSLA stock price. $24 to $2,900 ( split adjusted) in 10 years and larger than Ford, GM and any other one you want to pick combined.

however here is a good read on electric vehicles and their future.

The latest report by Bloomberg New Energy Finance shows that by 2040, 58% of global passenger vehicle sales will come from electric vehicles. At the same time, they will make up less than 33% of all the cars on the road.

https://policyadvice.net/insurance/insights/electric-car-statistics/

If you observe the issue about Bitcoin mining energy consumption, you'll understand that there was already some issue raised before these days when the development of technologies continues but those energy usage issues are primarily hyped just to cause misunderstanding about Bitcoin.

Absolutely not, based on what Elon Musk claims about climate concerns on BTC mining could be a factor for dips but not the end for BTC. The reason why BTC undergo massive dips for previous days is also caused by the Chinese government's crackdown on banks’ use of cryptocurrencies which results in accelerated long-predicted sell-off.

Of course, in the future, all economies will switch and use clean energy sources and certainly energy consumption for mining BTC and other cryptocurrencies will grow. However, this will not have much of an impact on the BTC price. If you think that the last drop in the price of BTC is related precisely to the amount of energy consumed, then you are mistaken, this is just one of the reasons to bring down the prices of cryptocurrency and buy it at a low price.

nope Its about what the consumer will invest in or not. We could solve all the worlds energy needs now and 100 years from now with Nuclear but the consumer is afraid of Nuclear.  They protest what they fear.

Apart from the fact that Bitcoin is already powered by renewable energy to a considerable degree, that is most likely only going to improve over time even further. Bitcoin might even be the reason for mining hardware manufacturers to invest in better and more environmental friendly hardware.

Needs to hold this 34K overnight + or - 1k swings

Bitcoin
BTC/USD
$ 34,104   -4.42 %

Who makes you believe that Bitcoin is consuming too much energy? Musk? You should not listen to him, but to the miners who are mining it. If they commit that btc is really becoming dangerous globally because of its energy consumption, then they can come to a solution and make btc more eco friendly on their own. I like Musk's initiative of reaching out to and approaching miners to turn to more green mining. But will you accept it if some day, that same guy starts reaching out to people and ask them to stop using electricity completely and go solar forcefully? Aren't we consuming too much electricity even without mining already?

you need to go back and read the conversation so you know what we are talking about. 

In a nut shell, I could care less about what an individual says but more in how people react.  If the consumer can use XYZ coin ( a very low power consuming POS) and achieve the same function, security and even better speed than High energy consuming POW BTC, then why not use XYZ

 

Not really. If the crypto market has to exist, BTC has to stay tight and upright all the time. Talking about the energy consumption patterns, we already have solutions in the form of renewable sources of energy. I think the market would more or less rectify itself, if there is a lot of buzz around dirty energy being used by miners. Miners would shift themselves to countries providing subsidies for using renewable sources of energy. Most of the countries around the world are already providing subsidy for renewable sources and new miners would base themselves in these countries. I think this is more like a self rectifying equilibrium, it will rectify itself. But yes greeners alts would prosper alot, basically the one's working of Proof of Stake Model.

I don't think that it will cause such thing for Bitcoin. Besides, I'm pretty sure that renewable energy will start being used fully on Bitcoin mining in the near future. Especially Elon Musk's statements can have a big impact on it.

Energy?  usage?  Billions are spent on useless energy projects every month in the world.   Think about the local automobile dealership, they run lights all night long, parking lot lights, lights inside, they have computers that stay on 24 hours a day.   No one every worries about how much energy they use.   Consider this, Large companies that melt aluminum and other large industries expend huge amounts of energy to produce something as novel as aluminum foil.  Anyone worried about that?  No this is not about energy at all.   Musk is an idiot, if you want to know what this is all about, just think about the bigger picture.   Why are they suddenly so concerned with energy?  No its about banking and finance, they do not like the idea that anyone can access banking and finance with sophisticated crypto financial products.   It is a power they have controlled for centuries.   No one is really concerned with energy use, because Visa and Mastercard, process billions of transactions which are no different than the transactions processed by mining bitcoin.   In fact visa and mastercard consume 30 times more energy than bitcoin and other crypto currency combined.   Just understand that the idea that bitcoin is causing global warming is BULL...   These are the same people that want to save the whales, but never really do save them, they want to they just can't do it because it was never under their control in the first place.   This is emotion over intellect, which is why I say that if Musk really believes that global warming is caused by bitcoin then he is truly stupid.

you agree with me then, the masses are going to do what they want to do regardless of the engineering and endless debates.  An Electrical Engineer argued with me for 10 years as to why Tesla would never make it. He had all the numbers and figures and never invested a dime at $24 a share. He is still eating crow today because no matter what he thought, the masses started a movement into electric vehicles verses Gasoline.  So if the consumer wants to use NANO for example instead of BTC because it uses very little power there is nothing to stop them.   

Every trader wants profits and their best bet is btc because they know how hard it has become for miners to mine it. They are keeping its price high because of the resources being used to mine it, making a direct correlation between consumption of resources to mine a btc and its present value.

Now, when talking about security, none of the PoS coins in my views can beat the security of btc, please draw me to one which can and I will think of changing my portfolio from btc to that xyz coin. If such a thing would exist, it would have taken over btc already. Every node validates a transaction making it more difficult for a hacker to break the chain and move that transaction his way. I agree that the speed of btc may be less if compared to so many altcoins there, but we still use it because we know the value it has given to crypto and is still adding it with its mining. And when all the alts (your PoS coins included) are created to provide the nearly same functions that btc gives, I would twist and turn your question and ask you: why not to use btc over them when they are only copying what btc did years ago? In the end, it is all about choosing the right coin and if btc is my right coin, I will go for it and you may go for your PoS coin. :)

great points exactly what I was looking for in these conversations. What had me worried about BTC was what price does it have to hold to be profitable currently and after the next halving.  At what point would a miner say my electric cost are to high to sustain a profit.  If you supplement with solar you have increased your cost. 

right now it looks like 40% of revenue goes toward electricity cost. https://www.coinwarz.com/mining/bitcoin/calculator?h=110.00&p=3250.00&pc=0.17&pf=0.00&d=21434395961349.00000000&r=6.25000000&er=1&btcer=47197.18580000&ha=TH&hc=2407.00&hs=0&hq=1

Monero seems to be pretty secure also with a $625k reward to break its code but I don't see it as a better option than BTC either. 
https://currency.com/the-most-secure-cryptocurrency

so strictly as an investment I think Harmony, Nano, Helium and ALGO will have a higher percentage gain than BTC in the next six months,  BTC defiantly has proven endurance on its side.  :)

no electric cars are expensive. will probably wait for 10 years to own one. will just use my bike if EV isnt worth $1K. $1k is even way high.

the people who certainly wanted to control BTC decentralization doesnt have the energy source to keep mining  BTC so they ban the use of fossil sources. this is controling BTC and what they want miners to use is the tesla batteries.

In Bitcoin Security ,
Is it the High PoW Hash rate that keep it secure
or
is it the Fact that the top 4 mining pool operators have so far agreed not to collude their over 51%
and double spend or other shenanigans.

And yes, we all know miners can point their miners at different pools,
but the point is , those 4 pool operators only need 3 to 6 confirmations to double-spend, where it can't be undone
so ~1 hour for them to totally destroy bitcoin security as you know it.
Odds are the miners would not even find out for 4 to 6 hours after it happened.
https://medium.com/mit-media-lab-digital-currency-initiative/who-is-monitoring-mining-pools-65de79b90710

If that is secure to you, good for you.  :)

However a PoS coin such as Cardano has 2,523 Active Pools.
So for me , I'll sleep better with Cardano security ,not to mention it's energy efficiency means no government has to ban it.

Bitcoin only offers ~7 transactions per second, Cardano offers 256 transactions per second.
Bitcoin   Blockspeed 10 minutes
Cardano Blockspeed 20 seconds
 
To me Cardano wins hands down, but I also am not following bitcoin like a religion.   :)

The actual tech specs are all that matter to me.

FYI:
Cost for the Bitcoin Pool operators to 51% attack the BTC network is $Zero  .
Cost for an outside entity to 51% attack BTC is $612,664, for an hour-long 51% attack.
source: https://www.jumpstartmag.com/understanding-51-attacks-on-blockchains/

Cost for an entity to 51% attack Cardano, is ~$24 Billion US Dollars, for even a short 1 hour attack.
And that is only if buying up the Cardano does not raise the price per coin. Which it would.
Plus spending ~$24 billion just to destroy the value of that money , is not a wise choice.  :D
I feel safer with Proof of Stake coin Cardano, but that is just me.

The most important thing is the performance or the advantage of the money. Many companies destroy our planet little by little, although some of them said that they just "we safe the earth by creating this and that products" but I think they just don't realize it yet. If all companies do their job in the right way then maybe we will not hear about global warming, polution and etc. Even I don't think that electric car company really don't make any polution. Steel, ruber, glass and etc are needed in order to make a car, and I am not sure that in the process of making of that there is no negative impact for earth. I think if bitcoin spread evenly and the price become more stable it can safe many people life. People will be safe from inflation that make them poor. In my opinion fiat makes us poor, holding fiat for years is not an investment, it is just make us poorer evertime because of inflation. So bitcoin will not fall only because of that.

From the recent policies introduced by some countries, it can be seen that energy shortages do affect the development and mining of Bitcoin, but this will not cause the collapse of Bitcoin, because countries like Iran have only temporarily banned them. In fact, they Still have to continue mining, and according to research shows that mining consumes very little energy, and they are mining in some areas with more hydropower energy, not only does not cause excessive energy consumption, but also makes energy distribution more reasonable.

Energy consumption is much into discussion these days, and the big controversy is now once again getting shattered by Elon Musk. It is also stated that, banks now consume more power than the bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. With time, efficiency is getting achieved on bitcoin mining equipments. Based on this I don't think energy consumption will set to be a big issue in the future.

Bitcoin's energy consumption is just one of the minor issues. Many countries prohibit Bitcoin mining and other activities, which also reflects from the side that these countries want to regulate these mining activities, whether it will affect their country's legal currency, so Some countries will take measures against Bitcoin.

There are already miners who make it as their business so even there are increased in energy consumption they can still sustain it provided they already have many apparatus uses in their business. Some might use solar to continuous their business. this is good to big miners but for individuals who just use their own electricity it can be a lose in their profit but not in bitcoin.

With small scale miners the better option is to increase the capital investment and setup solar power/other means of sustainable energy for mining needs. During the year of 2018 myself spend around $15000 on mining, and if I've bought some cryptocurrency and kept hold of it I could've earned big by this bull market. So, I personally suggest to invest on much expected small price cryptocurrencies and leave it for years than getting into mining.

The problem of energy consumption when mining bitcoin has already been raised and it must be addressed, otherwise many large investors will stop investing in bitcoin. This will lead to a drop in demand for it and, of course, a drop in its price. It seems to me that there was a fairly large vulnerability in bitcoin. The problem of energy consumption, and not from renewable sources, is now very urgent in connection with the sharp changes in climate. It seems that bitcoin will have a very difficult time in the near future.

I don't think energy consumption will result in Bitcoin's downfall. Bitcoin miners will always move towards any means that will be better in the coming future for Bitcoin mining. This is natural since the general energy consumption is moving towards that direction anyways and I see Bitcoin miners going that route.

CZ tweeted https://twitter.com/cz_binance/status/1399195759140954112


this tweet retweets and received likes more than his usual tweets. you can see the media that surrounds elon had not even thought of pointing electricity issues.


it's not a bitcoin downfall but will just adjust the price for a bit because they can make it happen. miners will play along if the law will make it illegal for not using green source.

will energy consumption be the crash of bitcoin`` bitcoin has been operating for a long time, actually it's been almost 13 years, why is it only now that people say bitcoin has fallen because of energy, why from the past, after elon musk negative tweets about bitcoin, now it has spread to other things other things, I think this is all made by greedy rich people, who want to take advantage of adversity...

How can be the downfall of Bitcoin if there is a possibilities that sooner energy consumptions will be the main goal of bitcoin developments?

yeah now there is a large energy consumptions of Bitcoin mining but we also knew that nowadays there are only small bitcoin amount are available to be mined.

It is not the longevity but what is the effect to the world now.
Sorry but since the beginning of my journey here, there are already existing issue like this.

Solar is great but only good for 10 hours a day and on clear days to boot. That also doesn't change the fact of the disadvantage of needing so much power for POW vs a crypto such as NANO


The electric car movement was more about for every electric car there was one less gasoline air polluting vehicle on the road. Volvo is going total electric. 

If you talk about other alts based on pos or some other algorithm then it work as more centralized base system to the rich and superior ones and if you wish to invest in them then nobody's gonna stop you but don't ask for Bitcoin like security.Did this energy consumption has increased suddenly after the Musk comments and some government statement? The miners need to put more effort to mine block with increasing difficulty and providing security to the network.Many mining pools are finding alternative ways to mine Bitcoin using renewable sources because electric consumption also reduces their profitability.They are reluctant to find some alternates for this.But one thing is for sure Bitcoin is not going to be dead inspite of many FUD in the market like in the past.

the fall of bitcoin was due to energy problems, in my opinion it was just a gimmick,, all of it was just a trick of billionaires to scare beginners, in order to collect bitcoins, once a year bitcoin there must be a price drop, why when bitcoin falls everyone posts negative things about bitcoin,, why when the price starts to stabilize everyone is silent, and enjoys what they get.. stop saying bitcoin is falling in price because of energy..

  I did invest in many alts, DASH,LTC,ETH, MONA XMR + BTC and physical BTC Casascius pre $500. I've had the concern over POW mining since then, its only come to mainstream attention after Musk now that he has the worlds attention. Another celebrity type mentioned it in 2016/17 when he moved a mining operation to Washington state but many didn't listen to him as some think he is nuts anyway lol. But that was John McAfee, he is currently facing federal charges for falsely promoting cryptocurrency through his twitter account while his buds sold it. I dont think BTC will ever die either however I can envision it loosing market dominance down to 10% in the next ten years.



over $500 Billion left the market that was more than just beginners :) 

If we continue to ignore the issue, pretty sure something will replace bitcoin in it's high chair. But I don't think that we will have to worry too much about it since it will be a long time and most minings in bitcoin are slowly moving to renewable energy.

Moving to renewables would end the carbon debate on bitcoin,
but sadly it does not remove the raising the prices or blacking out a power grid debates that cause the banning of PoW mining.

For Bitcoin energy usage not to keep getting banned.
It must find a way to quit raising energy prices on others and quit causing blackouts on the power grids
putting others in danger, by not having heat or AC, or being able to refrigerate/cook food.
God forbid a Hospital is on the same grid as a few warehouse of miners if their is a major drain on the grid such as a heatwave or massive cold snap.

If you look at China, most miners were on Hydroelectric plants,
China still kicked them out, reason they used more than the surrounding populace and drove prices up and increases the potential for black outs, which put the populace in danger especially during their record cold spell last winter.
No one freezing to death in subzero temperatures cares at all about the btc network.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LjEMDoYEzM

So renewables would not be the 100% solution, a major design change is required,
either move to PoS , or find another way that is not an insane energy wasting system.
A design change is the only real solution in the long run.

Exactly. I don't get what the big deal is about Bitcoin's energy consumption, when existing financial institutions consume more energy than Bitcoin on a daily basis. It's all failed attempt to spread FUD in order to lure people away from Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies in general. Bitcoin can be much greener than what it is right now, if miners rely on alternative energy sources. Imagine how Bitcoin would benefit the environment if most ASIC machines relied on solar or wind energy. With how fast our world is changing, we might see this become a reality sometime in the future. Since PoW is the most secure (and decentralized) consensus algorithm to date, it's hard to believe Bitcoin will switch to PoS anytime soon. On the contrary, Bitcoin will remain as a PoW cryptocurrency while the rest of the altcoins will switch to PoS in order to "tackle" the high energy consumption. Ethereum will switch to PoS, and other PoW-based cryptocurrencies will follow as the PoS hype comes into fruition. I wouldn't worry about Elon Musk abandoning Bitcoin in favor for another altcoin, as long as the pioneer cryptocurrency as some loyal supporters behind it. Just my opinion :)

although I don't think so, because from the start bitcoin was POW. even though bitcoin consumes quite a lot of electrical energy, there will still be a lot of interest because the reason is one POW itself, besides that this is a king and king, even though electricity is big and even though it is not environmentally friendly the king will still be king, it's hard to replace bitcoin

Considering how Elon Musk mentioned that too much use of fossil fuel is what led him to remove bitcoin as a mode of payment in Tesla, there will be a lot of people who would be thinking the same way he does since he is very influential. If we would look at the bigger picture, there are a lot more things or organizations that uses too much energy but none of them were ever criticized unlike with bitcoin. Maybe if people would try to understand more how the world works in this era, they would know why energy consumption on bitcoin should not be the cause of it being hardly judged.

I was reading today about an electric automotive company that is building in a mechanism into their electric vehicles that will mine crypto while driving.  The future is now.

Seems that has already been occurring.  New crypto investors don't care about decentralization or security.  They just want to see their number go up.  We are literally smack in the middle of the Greater Fool Theory.  We've seen 1 rug pull so far, but I think that was just a precursor.  The rug pull we'll see come December will leave people with their jaws on the ground.  On the plus side, a $30K Bitcoin will be viewed as a complete collapse, giving those of us with level heads the opportunity to do this all over again in 2025, if Bitcoin survives it's community that long.

I watch the BTC market share pretty close every time there is a big swing, BTC holds in there tough 40 to 43%. I still find it interesting there isn't one (top 100) crypto I know of that can stand alone on its own merit when BTC takes a dive.. It just disrupts the world of crypto

unfortunately, not many people are willing to dig deeper on this aspect. but i don't think it will be the cause of the downfall of btc because the chance of happening this scenario is low. bitcoin miners can always convert to using renewable-energy sources, so in that case, this energy issue will not be a problem anymore.
and youre very right, there are other human activities and industries that are actually energy intensive and wasting energy, and yet, they are not being criticised.
they are just highlighting the consumption of bitcoin because it is the current technology that a lot are talking about. and they need to find some loopholes on how to discourage people on not to patronise this tech

This is all temporary. The price of electricity will in the medium term future trend towards zero as photovoltaic panels become more and more efficient. This will be especially true for countries well exposed to sunlight. While the farms will still consume lots of energy, it will be where it is cheap, abundant and with very low environmental impact.

If someone is actually smart enough to find a way to create an actual decentralized currency with fair initial distribution and that doesn't use PoW, then sure, maybe there's a chance. But seriously, nah.

40-43% still is a big chunk of money loss. everybody will just sell and run when the price plummets it's been going on for over 10 years already, those who hold are the ones hopeful that bulls will quickly resume but it has yet not happened in history because it always takes time to see the bottom. if the price goes $28k, a lot of us will still be selling. the wisest wins because they are going to buy back stacking sats.

i was thinking we have been fighting global warming since 90s nothing has changed still. now shifting to electric. US has no source of gasoline anymore so they all want to shift when the middle east has tons.

Bitcoin will eventually destroy itself. In a world taking extreme measures to limit carbon footprints.
How could Bitcoin ever survive such an obvious infrastructure built on wasting energy?

The problem of using the quantity and quality of energy by bitcoin has already risen and now, when this problem has become very urgent in connection with a sharp climate change, regardless of whether this problem is contrived or not, true or not, states will seize the opportunity to denigrate cryptocurrency and take action to restrict her walking. Therefore, cryptocurrency will have to change and prove that it consumes a small amount of clean energy. This is especially true for bitcoin, because it is he who has now gained great popularity among the cryptocurrency. If bitcoin does not change in this regard, it will lose its significance, whether we want it or not.

it's inevitable for Bitcoin to consume electricity, but this is never why Bitcoin got prohibited in some area. We know that some country banned Bitcoin mining due to its shortage in electricity supply in that mining hindered people's basic need. but that banning is temporary. We saw China banned bitcoin mining, too. but I do not think it has much to do with electricity usage, just an excuse to adapt itself to the development of cryptocurrencies...or to find a way to avoid the harnessness of USD and find something to defeat USD. so, energy is just a veil to hide the true attempt of opposing crypto coins. Energy can be saved and used efficiently in many other ways, bitcoin is totally negligible.

no not a loss that is Market Share, BTC's overall capture of the $1.7T crypto market or whatever it happens to be at the time. That's actually pretty good for BTC in a show of strength.

Here is some more good news on the Energy front as Gates and Warren put their money into Nuclear power

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jun/03/bill-gates-warren-buffett-new-nuclear-reactor-wyoming-natrium

I guess miners will go green someday. They have to adapt. It's just an issue we need to solve.

Wasting solar energy that could go to power homes, schools and infrastructure is NOT the
answer to a simple avoidable problem. The problem is people think wasting energy gives Bitcoin its value. This thinking must change. People give Bitcoin its power NOT power consumption. Bitcoin Mining is an arms race and no one wins except the power companies.

Bitcoin may be using a lot of electric energy and fossil fuels now. But this will change sooner or later. There are already miners who use renewable energy in mining. In the future, Bitcoin miners will start using only renewable energy. So I don't think the current situation could be its downfall.

you get it

the fall of bitcoin is not an energy problem, but there are other problems that are more serious than that, I think the decline in the price of bitcoin is caused by greedy people, the decline in bitcoin in my opinion cannot be separated from three big numbers, such as the CEO of Tesla, Elon Musk, and the Minister of Finance The United States (US), which has expressed skepticism about digital currency, bitcoin...

There are reports saying that 76% come from renewable energy for Bitcoin, but only 39% for other coins that are PoW. If others switch to POS anyway and Bitcoin increases its renewable energy mining even further, I don't see the energy consumption turn into a problem.

the problem they point out is that the energy that the miners consume boils the ocean because it causes global warming. but we all know this is just a fud.

they thought the higher the energy cost for mining BTC the higher its value. if you think about it, miners not selling their coins in loss because of their bills, then it's how things work. the rate of electricity is regulated by the government. but whatever argument will be, BTC will be valuable. either mined by renewable energy or not because BTC has demand for it can't be confiscated.

If there are robots that will improve productivity quickly, you can build more power plants ahead of time.

Mining is just incredibly inefficient. That's a simple fact. Every other industry makes use of its exhaust heat. Miner create millions of watt of exhaust heat unused. That's pretty ridiculous in my opinion if you have a technology these days that is viewed as cutting edge. 

hello sir, I think it will come true after we see how broken the market is now, maybe everyone will choose altcoins as a backup, or as a backup when bitcoin is at its lowest price

exhaust is like 1%

if it was efficient to use heat to create electric from the heat of that same electric device.
then that would be perpetual energy..
however you wont be able to power a kettle perpetually with its own steam.
and thats even when 100% energy is going towards heat production

so when a kettle can use 3.25kw to boil water to 100^o
but an asic that uses 3.25kw to mine only emits a 1^o of heat
it would require over 100 asics to boil a kettle.

i hope you start to see your error in assumption.. if not continue reading
and then the loss of energy in the steam->turbine->electric wire transfer means it would require even more then 100 asics just to power 1 asic

thus the under 1% 'inefficiency' by not using its own heat..

as for millions of watts. aka 1MW.
well asics if all combined in one area is about say 4gwh spent electric(38tw/y). so if all that heat emission was to be re-utilised would create ~20mwh

in short. 1.3mill asics heat emission. if utilised. would only power about 6k asics
0.46%
(i even ignored many factors of conversion to try giving you a over assumed number in your favour. real number is much lower)

Since this is the basis of your argument, can you explain where this assumption/fact comes from.

With regard to thermodynamics you create 3.25KW of heat. The only problem is its density and how to extract it most efficiently. Bitcoin is just a nice virtual surplus.

There are already studies about efficient and affordable thermomagnetic materials for harvesting low grade waste heat.

https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/5.0033970 (https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/5.0033970)

Bitcoin as a catalyst of social change is obliged to be at the forefront of these technologies.

The propaganda of Bitcoin's enemies has little to do with the facts.

And if it does, it will always be an example of a selective, unfair, instrumental approach to facts.

Bitcoin mining is infinitely energy efficient, if you take into account the proportion of incurred energetic cost to benefits.
Each mined bitcoin (representing hardest possible, highest form of money) will serve users until the end of the world, changing owners an infinite number of times.
In an infinitely effective way (i.e. with negligible fees), because mainly with the help of countless L2 solutions, not on L1.
No bitcoin will ever have to be mined again (except for attempted attacks on the network), and the sum of bitcoins mined will never exceed the amount specified in the protocol.
Thanks to merged mining, once a proof of work is made, it can be reused by an unlimited number of other networks (not necessarily monetary ones), with virtually no additional energy expenditure.

This is, of course, the opposite of fiat currencies and PoS altcoins.
The number of units of these currencies increases infinitely and this process will never end, and the energy demand for securing them will also increase forever.
Since traditional financial, control and supervisory systems use energy, and energy is also used to wage trade wars, armed conflicts and to accelerate consumerism (a necessary condition for the survival of any inflationary currency).

And this cannot be stopped unless a Bitcoin standard, similar to the gold standard prevailing before, is adopted.

Like Daniel wrote in his essay on the nakamotoinstitute https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/its-not-about-the-technology-its-about-the-money/ (https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/its-not-about-the-technology-its-about-the-money/) Bitcoin's value is a collective hallucination that derives its value from its narrative, like any other virtual value attribute to something physical.
Bitcoin's success depends on this narrative. If the narrative doesn't connect to the people Bitcoin will be worth nothing.
One of the greatest obstacles in that regard will be the narrative of sustainability, because it is one of the most influential narratives in our time, whether you like or not.
That is why every company that is seriously generating value on the internet (Google, Amazon etc.) has committed itself to act sustainable.
If Bitcoin and its community manages to set the standard in sustainability the narrative of Bitcoin is hardened not weakened and would proof the critics wrong once more. Its an opportunity not a threat.
 

your review is very reasonable my friend is very interested in your review the king is still the king whatever happens the king is difficult to replace with more and more enthusiasts, the price of bitcoin is even more soaring because the items that are sought after must be expensive, I also don't agree that bitcoin prices go down because of energy waste .

I would agree that Bitcoin is not a tap water that needs no ideology/narrative at all...
But when we have a system that thermodynamically is incomparably better than the previous ways of creating and securing money, it should be able to survive even periods of deep pushed into the counterculture zone.
It may be still too early to dream that such periods are over.
Energy consumption of 0.2% of global consumption is met with aggression as if it were at least 20%, and when you try to discuss and explain that mining could facilitate the transition to renewable energy and achieve the goal of a carbon neutral economy, you can easily come across an attitude like "lalalalala, I can't hear you".

No, it won't. Because Bitcoin mining won't go on like this by consuming high electricity and using fossil fuels at a high rate. Eventually, we will see it continuing with 100 percent renewable energies. Then, it could even be its rise rather than a "downfall".

Energy consumption will not lead to the collapse of bitcoin. The production and transportation of banknotes will also consume energy. Since the emergence of banknotes, the energy consumption is no less than that of bitcoin.

Bitcoin mining is mainly in some countries with excess electricity, and mainly in areas with hydropower and solar power generation. Electricity will not be preserved, it can be used to use electricity, so as not to waste electricity.

As for the shortage of energy in the future, it is not only blockchain technology that consumes a large amount of energy in the world, but also big data technology. If you want to combat the culprit of energy consumption, you can't just hold onto the blockchain technology. Moreover, only considering the energy consumption of blockchain mining is obviously not comprehensive. Google information security engineer Marc Bevand believes that miners' demand for energy will stimulate innovation in the field of renewable energy, and blockchain technology is likely to promote the demand for clean energy.

I know what you mean! Its related to the fact, that energy is the foundation of our civilization and is still largely in the hands of a few monopolies. They not only fear Bitcoin they also fear the decentralization of energy production. Since Bitcoin enables raising the profit of small renewable plants, it increases the autonomy of the individual on that level. In some countries subsidies for old power plants are running out. Old wind turbines and solar plants sell there electricity for less than 5cent. People are already starting to built data centers nearby.

I don’t really think so. But yes a lot of people don’t like that bitcoin consumes a lot of energy, and for sure there are going to be people who are going to leave Bitcoin to go for all those greener altcoins, but that is not the end for Bitcoin. If you have been reading the news or doing research about bitcoin mining, you’re going to know that a lot of mining companies now are starting to move to mining Bitcoin with renewable energy source. I know of a company that 95% of their mining is with renewable energy, and then 5% is from nuclear.

there is a possibility that it will happen, but all there must be very neat research because bitcoin is already at its highest point than other investments..
and also many people who already understand about bitcoin

  People are aware there are more than one mined cryptocurrency just as there is more than one bank competing for consumer business. Now that there are crypto's competition for market share cryptos such as Nano may start capturing a little more of the market. BTC will continue to get the Lions share for many more years as it was the first, is well weathered and has the name.


I think at the very least we will start seeing some diversification into established coins using POS as regardless of the sources of energy its vastly less than POW

By the time it is a must to think of the scenario without POW. Such a scenario isn't possible, because majority of the POS coins gets tied to the POW in some form and there is massive dependence. The better solution is the production of energy efficient hardware equipments.

the source of energy that causes problems in the world today is not only bitcoin so that there is a public opinion drive on bitcoin mining including one of the biggest contributors to the energy crisis but here the postal system which may be one solution there are still some who doubt it is not like the pow system already running

But I am a bit overwhelmed by the implications from a game theoretical perspective: mining is nothing but a competition for the next block reward/transaction fees. If we have more efficient hardware available for anyone, which it should be for the sake of decentralization and to avoid monopolistic mining, how then would that lead to a greener Bitcoin? Everyone could just buy the same mining hardware. Either more efficient mining hardware, which is probably more expensive, or less efficient hardware but more of it. Isn't in the end always the price of Bitcoin which dictates the carbon footprint in quite a direct way?

That may be the case, but not now. Now there is no environmentally friendly crypto, If it is possible that he will become a rival to bitcoin in the future. But, it's been more than 3 years I've been in cryptocurrency I do not see the absence of an environmentally friendly cryptocurrency, I think some reliable programmers definitely immediately make it. We're all looking forward to it.

People moved to electric cars to save GAS/Patrol spending not to save the environment. Electric cars run on electricity and this electricity is mostly generated by burning fossil fuels.
PoW is power greedy and I don't think it will be replaced by any other consensus algo in the future. A counter argument is that bitcoin power consumption can be justified by using clean energy i.e. generated from water, wind, sun etc.

Cryptocurrencies are just electricity users and they aren't directly using power sources, what we should worry about is the electric power plants that uses pollutants to produce electricity. Think of crypto as a consumer and not as a provider.

Currently, fossil fuel-powered cars are still popular and countries have their own emission standards and other policies to balance the environment.
Bitcoin mining too, Bitcoin mining equipment is upgraded every year and has more renewable energy sources. Therefore, we need to look at Bitcoin positively.
I think users will not trade off security and decentralization when using Bitcoin to use other cryptocurrencies.

I think Bitcoin creates corresponding value with the energy it consumes, and the situation is far less serious than what the opponents say. Bitcoin will become a powerful force, and the energy used will be more environmentally friendly. The reliable economic incentives of the Bitcoin network will help the economy of renewable energy sources such as solar and wind energy. Moreover, the consumption of energy is not the same as the release of carbon emissions into the atmosphere, and Bitcoin has very little carbon emissions.

The value of the Bitcoin network is the same as that of other industries. It can use energy to create economic value. Although Bitcoin mining does consume energy, the question is, does it make sense to use energy to protect the Bitcoin network and process transactions? The answer is yes. The value storage and transfer of the Bitcoin network realizes value for its holders.

The best form of the Bitcoin environmental case is to provide a simple way for power generation companies to monetize energy, and these redundant stores would have been wasted. For example, the electricity generated by wind power equipment peaks at night when the demand for electricity is low. Or, solar power generation equipment in sunny periods often exceeds consumer demand. In these cases, the resulting stores are surplus, which hinders the profitability of the power company. However, if these power companies sell part of the cheap electricity to Bitcoin miners, it will be a win-win situation: both parties can make more money, and the whole process does not produce carbon emissions.

Not the investors I Know they were all part of a green energy movement with less air pollution. A lot of charging station across the country are solar powered.


Regardless of the energy source the point is its an unnecessary use of energy. There are cryptos that accomplish the same function with almost no power consumption.   

bitcoin's energy consumption, and the resulting carbon emissions, will only go in one direction, namely increasing, "electricity consumption and now there are some who have started using environmentally friendly energy to reduce electricity costs. It's just that this is still in the planning stage and is being pioneered by companies which incidentally is engaged in this sector while individual mining may only use some of this solar energy due to the difficulty in making adequate and stable environmentally friendly energy with the tools/computers used, as well as the funds

No, I think Bitcoin miners will be the ones to develop into eco-friendly machines.  You are forgetting something here I guess.  Technology develops thus looking back on how people mine bitcoin from CPU to ASIC and from high energy-consuming ASIC to more powerful but more energy-efficient machine.  Possibly we can see mining farms being powered by renewable energy such as solar, windmill, and hydro plants which actually available in the energy industry.

We would really be heading there if this issue would continue to be raised in upcoming years towards bitcoin mining then it would really finding out some solution about it and its true that techonology does progress and we wont know on what would be invented next and this might be already get resolved
with those environmental issues but actually i dont see it to be that major and they are the only ones who do really make it a big deal
but basing off with the energy been used and with the supply where i can see to be sufficient.

I personally do not think that investors' interest in Bitcoin will decrease for such reasons. Bitcoin is a major driving force in the crypto market and can not remain without interest from investors.

And yet, more and more Bitcoin mining farms are turning to renewable energy sources, which could soon lead to a completely "green" Bitcoin mining and that won't be a problem then.

I don't think energy consumption will be the downfall of bitcoin, but it surely will affect bitcoin if from time to time there will be mining sites that need to close down due to high electricity consumption.

Bitcoin really consumes a lot of electricity in mining which was the usual issue during the past months already. There was even a news that a mining site related to bitcoin was forced to close down because China's government has been reserving their power consumption. Maybe this scenario will make the mining corporations to slowly switch from being eco-friendly. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think bitcoin consumes still lesser energy compared to big private mining corporations and companies. IMO it shouldn't be a big issue. Although I really do hope that mining becomes more environmental friendly since I'm also aware of the repercussions it may cause to the overall state of our planet.

The solution to the high energy consumption of bitcoin mining will more likely involve an increase in the proportion of this energy coming from renewable sources rather than a need to move to a different "more eco-friendly" alternative to bitcoin.

This gasoline to electric powered isn't fully realised  ::) so I wouldn't say it's a complete success, but I get were you going in relation to bitcoin and we need to ask ourselves critically how to do away with pollution and reducing carbon emissions .

I honestly think making bitcoin great will be based on this problem solving and no one will throw shade like Elon did which was the truth and this triggered a huge fall from ~$50k to ~$30k.  Going forward we need ecofriendly ways of mining, I just hope this doesn't disrupt the network.

That's certainly true, mate. There's basically no such thing as "environmentally-friendly". One way or another, fossil fuels are used, harming the environment as we know it. Bitcoin's energy consumption may seem high to many, but it's in fact low when compared to the amount of energy consumed by traditional financial institutions (aka banks). The pioneer cryptocurrency can go green, if miners decide to run their equipment on solar or wind energy. Saying that Bitcoin is harmful to the environment is only a failed attempt to spread FUD from mainstream media, banks, and wealthy people alike. No matter the criticism, Bitcoin will thrive because of its decentralized and censorship-resistant design. I don't think Bitcoin will switch to PoS in the future, because the consensus algorithm is not as secure as PoW is.

Nonetheless, it seems to me that PoW ain't going anywhere. High or low energy consumption won't make a difference since it's used to help secure the Blockchain. ASIC mining hardware will certainly improve over time as chips become more energy efficient than ever. As long as Bitcoin remains decentralized and censorship-resistant, nothing else matters. I'd envision a future where most altcoins will switch to PoS, while Bitcoin remains with the classic "Nakamoto Consensus". There are far more important things to focus on besides Bitcoin's energy consumption. Just my thoughts ;D

It doesn't look like we will see such thing in the future. Bitcoin mining is getting greener as time goes on. At some point, there will be no dependency on fossil fuels and electricity I believe.

Will energy consumption be Bitcoins downfall ?


Of course not. If it comes to it, Bitcoin folks will simply build their own power plants. Then they will make money off selling electricity as well... besides Bitcoin.


8)

the argument isn't so much as "where" the energy comes from, its that fact that it uses a great deal for computations.

Considering this is still an evolving market and seems that POW has the advantage of being more secure, what happens when exchanges start offering insured accounts up to x amount just like a bank.  I believe Coinbase already has some type of account guaranty against unauthorized use. Its interesting of the 10 plus accounts I had the last five years with 50 plus different crypto's I never had an unauthorized transaction.  However my Visa card has been compromised no less than five times :)

Just thinking of the future and how things evolve, I was told BTC could never go to POS which I thought was the way.     

   

That is an often misspoken fallacy, PoW is not more secure than PoS,
Both are secure or insecure depending on 1 specific condition , the Majority.

Many PoW Coins have suffered 51% attacks,
Many PoS  Coins have suffered 51% attacks.

Some PoW coin have never suffered a 51% attack.
Some PoS  coin have never suffered a 51% attack.

The algorithms themselves will not secure a coin,
all that secure PoW is the majority of Pooled Hashrate,  
all that secure PoS is the majority of staking coins.

So the good will of the majority is the answer for both.

In Bitcoin Case as long as the top 4 pool operators don't collude, bitcoin is safe,
but if the top 4 pool operators ever do collude, 51% attack in bitcoin is unstoppable.
Kind of makes you wonder why people think bitcoin is so secure, when only 4 guys could totally decimate it in a day.  :)

In Cardano Case, they have over 2500 PoS pools, and they limit the max % one pool can dominate by code design.
So Cardano PoS has more protection from colluding mining pool operators than Bitcoin PoW.  :)
Because the collusion would take a much greater majority of operators than 4 like BTC.


FYI:
In Bitcoin PoW history ,
the Majority Rewrote 6 hours of bitcoin blocks in 2013, proving the majority will move the PoW chain however they deem fit.
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/bitcoin-network-shaken-by-blockchain-fork-1363144448
A Doublespend has occurred on the Bitcoin PoW network.  :P

No Doublespends have ever occurred on the Cardano PoS network.  :)

From the above, PoW does not seem all that secure.  ;)

great answer, security seemed to be the dominating augment for the use of BTC vs any other Alt

FWIW that event you are talking about was not a double spent, it was a database issue. The older software running nodes were using a different database system that had a block limit size. The nodes running the newer software had a different database system without that limit.
It was as if the dependencies forked BTC, not a villain mastermind that performed a double spent...


And regarding BTC mining power usage... creating demand will just increase the development of cheaper alternatives which are also more and more environmental friendly. Doubt anyone will open a coal mine next to a mining hub nowadays...

Wow, you really drank the Bitcoiner Cult Kool-aid
if you can't see that someone was watching the rewrite and took advantage of it for a double-spend in bitcoin ,
so whoever did it, made a $10K profit.
Contact the writer of the article, and tell him he does not understand crypto,
oh by the way the writer is Vitalik Buterin , the genius behind ethereum.   :D

If Bitcoin Proof of Waste does nothing but create new demand, then how do you resign yourself to the fact ,
that instead of just adding Nuclear or new Coal plants, that China rather just kick out the bitcoin miners.
Watch Texas and their new problems with rolling blackouts,
because asking a single state or county to sustain a geometric increase in energy drain, is not going to happen.  :)

FYI:
Renewable energy sources only increase worldwide ~4% per year,
Bitcoin energy waste can increase 80% in a year.
Source:  https://markets.businessinsider.com/currencies/news/bitcoin-energy-consumption-cambridge-study-cryptocurrencies-bitcoin-mining-climate-change-2021-3-1030180485
(That is like adding a new country to the planet every year, while our energy resources are drained, Unsustainable!)
No current source of energy production can keep pace with that type of geometric growth.
Which is why the banning of bitcoin is going to get much worse.

After making 1300+ commits on the bitcoin github repo (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin) I assume he understands crypto. Here, contact him yourself mate https://github.com/sipa or https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2786


Wow... you really don't know how crypto works, do you ?
That double spent (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=152348.0) did happen but it's the exchange's fault for not waiting for a number of confirmations before crediting the account. If your website does not need any confirmations for placed orders I can submit my order and buy your crappy ebook "all I know about crypto" and then make a new tx with higher fee to my other address. I buy the crappy ebook and also get to keep my crypto. Who's fault is it ?


That's literally what "the genius" wrote in the article as well:


It seems you read what he said and understood what you wanted to understand.

Enjoy your kool-aid.   :)

Thanks,
Love the taste of a fresh squized PoW without FUD in the morning  ;D

I don't think this can be called the downfall of bitcoin because in my opinion this is only a temporary decreasing effect of negative news that has occurred for some time and the policies of several countries that do not agree with bitcoin and this I don't think will make bitcoin fall because it will rise again.
and in this case, when viewed from an environmentally friendly perspective, it is possible that large-scale miners may think again and switch to environmentally friendly, not all miners will think the same

nope. there are many altcoin popping up, many member still join on them, but most of them will exchange to bitcoin. they sure if bitcoin is more powerful than other coin.
energy consumption never be problem to miner, because bitcoin still promise

we have to face the harsh reality, this consumption of electricity is a problem, mainly because it depends on cheap electricity for miners to make more profits. let's imagine if in every country in the world the cost of electricity is very high, how will the mining business survive? and what will it be like 10 years from now if things regarding electricity consumption are not resolved? honestly I don't see this problem being resolved in the future, on the contrary I see a very bleak future, governments are very controlling and establish many rules when it comes to electricity

I think, that most big crypto mining companies have always been trying to use clean energy for powering their mining rigs, and that is in order to maximize their profit in the long term, and to be honest that is what every one who is planning on making a marge mining rig should be thinking about, they should try to be self sufficient in terms of energy, even though its initial investment may seem closetful but it will pay it self of, and the more people that do so the more we attract more investors toward the crypto market.

this has absolutely no effect on the network, the cause may be more inclined to the words of Elon Musk and have an impact on the bitcoin stock market price, plus some pressure from countries that stop circulation in their own countries. Maybe that's one of the causes bitcoin's selling price drops.unless Elon Musk is able to rectify what he said some time ago

I don't get what the big deal is. Banks and other institutions use far more energy than Bitcoin itself. It's all an attempt to spread FUD in order to lure people away from Bitcoin. As long as the Blockchain remains decentralized, nothing else matters. At least, the energy consumed helps secure the Bitcoin network against external attacks.

PoS consumes less energy, but it's not as secure and reliable as PoW is. I guess that's why Bitcoin hasn't switched its consensus algorithm yet. It's a good thing because this keeps away centralized exchanges from getting control over the entire network. If you remember what happened with the Steem/Justin Sun dilemma, you'll see what I'm talking about. I see a future where most altcoins switch to PoS while Bitcoin remains with PoW for security, reliability, and censorship-resistance. Just my thoughts ;D