Bitcoin is Bad for the environment, taking the worlds energy - yes?

[CoinCarrie]

(I think this should go in mining)

There has been a lot of talk on this.  Quite a few good papers
https://karlodwyer.github.io/publications/pdf/bitcoin_KJOD_2014.pdf
From this paper: "Bitcoin mining is comparable to Ireland’s electricity consumption".



As bitcoin grows the amount of energy on the planet is not increasing. Anyone who understands the article, it seems very legitimate to me, discuss,   Yes, I realize the miner wants to reduce cost & cut waste.  Therefore they may seek alternative forms or desire to do so.  Yes, I read about the Hydrofarmer on this very forum.  It is just not the norm with all the major miners around the planet.  Proof of work is expensive. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work

**Title was sarcastic.  But it is still something to think about?

[1715037820]

1715037820

[1715037820]

1715037820

[1715037820]

1715037820

[1715037820]

1715037820

[shinratensei_]

(I think this should go in mining)

There has been a lot of talk on this.  Quite a few good papers
https://karlodwyer.github.io/publications/pdf/bitcoin_KJOD_2014.pdf
From this paper: "Bitcoin mining is comparable to Ireland’s electricity consumption".



As bitcoin grows the amount of energy on the planet is not increasing. Anyone who understands the article, it seems very legitimate to me, discuss,   Yes, I realize the miner wants to reduce cost & cut waste.  Therefore they may seek alternative forms or desire to do so.  Yes, I read about the Hydrofarmer on this very forum.  It is just not the norm with all the major miners around the planet.  Proof of work is expensive. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work

**Title was sarcastic.  But it is still something to think about?

"As bitcoin grows the amount of energy on the planet is not increasing"
Bitcoin mining it was consuming a lot of energy, and more people conduct mining activities it's it is not directly proportional to the increase in energy on the planet,even it's only waste a lot of the energy just for the benefit of one-sided.

[InvoKing]

To be honest we should compare the consumption of electricity used in bitcoin vs the electricity used in all the banks of the world, the machines that make the money...etc meanwhile we have to encourage the use of the clean sources of energy for bitcoin mining.
Back to the bad for environment things, bitcoin is way less ''toxic'' than the factories gases & wastes, the oil mines...etc and consume less energy
Bitcoin haters have a weird vision of things  

[gentlemand]

Mining uses more power than a country of 4-5 million people? Each of whom have washing machines, vibrators, Teslas, streetlamps outside their houses, trams and on and on.

I'm sure Bitcoin's carbon footprint is a disgrace considering the tiny number of users, but that seems like an excessive statistic.

[Carlton Banks]

The whole anthropogenic global warming debate is nothing more than a very smart way of making the people of the world pay government cronies for the right to breathe. Several doomsday scenarios were predicted to have struck midnight by the year 2016, and none of them have come to pass. Natural climate change is much, much more powerful than 0.01% changes in CO² atmospheric composition that burning fossil fuels has contributed; Bitcoin mining compares to the previous 2 factors as an infinitesimally small blip. OP is FUD.

[BitcoinPaw]

I think that we can say same about everything that taking worlds energy, people just trying to make money with any possible ways and bitcoin is one of them, nothing critical.

[manselr]

It takes resources to keep secure decentralized money running, so its energy well spent, we are getting freedom with Bitcoin, freedom is not cheap.

[josephmayer]

Wow, a perspective I have not had the pleasure of knowing! Though I don't completely agree with whats said, it is an eye opening article. Thanks for Sharing




My Site
http://www.EliteTranslingo.com

[Rizky Aditya]

I think that we already have so much extra energy that people don't use, it is better to use it for something good like mining Bitcoin. Banks probably use the same amount of energy as a Bitcoin farm. And there are far less Bitcoin farms compared to banks.

[CoinCarrie]

The whole anthropogenic global warming debate is nothing more than a very smart way of making the people of the world pay government cronies for the right to breathe. Several doomsday scenarios were predicted to have struck midnight by the year 2016, and none of them have come to pass. Natural climate change is much, much more powerful than 0.01% changes in CO² atmospheric composition that burning fossil fuels has contributed; Bitcoin mining compares to the previous 2 factors as an infinitesimally small blip. OP is FUD.

Did you read and understand the research?  The author is hardly a "Nazi environmentalist".  There are other journals out there which suggest the same.  Though they seem to be a little bias.  Which part of the research do you disagree with?

[angaper]

Every economic activity (and even every human activity) leaves a carbon footprint, but actually I don't think bitcoin mining is an important factor to affect the worldwide environment so much. Paper money has previously affected much more, and mining to get the necessary metals to minting coins has been much more damaging.

[disclaimer201]

Maybe decentralization and solar power can play a role in the future of mining. Chinese mega farms are run by coal power plants and are more dependent on bitcoin's price and profitability. Lots of people with solar panels on their roof (and perhaps battery/accu solutions in their basement) could sustain the network even if the big farms can no longer turn a profit while considerably hurting the environment. Home miners can and always have used the heat from mining to heat their houses in winter, spring and fall. They would need to "waste" that heat in one way or another, so using it for securing the btc network is a reasonable purpose/bonus. Sure, mining on solar power will not sustain a big farm (depending on your house I guess) but bitcoin would still work without the mega farms. All that needs to happen is a considerable price correction, unfortunately.

[groll]

(I think this should go in mining)

There has been a lot of talk on this.  Quite a few good papers
https://karlodwyer.github.io/publications/pdf/bitcoin_KJOD_2014.pdf
From this paper: "Bitcoin mining is comparable to Ireland’s electricity consumption".



As bitcoin grows the amount of energy on the planet is not increasing. Anyone who understands the article, it seems very legitimate to me, discuss,   Yes, I realize the miner wants to reduce cost & cut waste.  Therefore they may seek alternative forms or desire to do so.  Yes, I read about the Hydrofarmer on this very forum.  It is just not the norm with all the major miners around the planet.  Proof of work is expensive. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work

**Title was sarcastic.  But it is still something to think about?

I have read that paper. But i dont think it will be a matter since there are mining farms right now that are using solar power. I think its halleybtc and cryptomining.farm that uses solar power. If new generation minng farms will use alternative energy then power consumption is no longer a problem.

[xuan87]

Its true that bitcoin mining activity consumes a lot of energy, but it can be handle with solar power and other other solution and if thats is being handled i dont think bitcoin is bad for environment again

[Btcvilla]

This years Darwin award goes to...

The whole anthropogenic global warming debate is nothing more than a very smart way of making the people of the world pay government cronies for the right to breathe. Several doomsday scenarios were predicted to have struck midnight by the year 2016, and none of them have come to pass. Natural climate change is much, much more powerful than 0.01% changes in CO² atmospheric composition that burning fossil fuels has contributed; Bitcoin mining compares to the previous 2 factors as an infinitesimally small blip. OP is FUD.

[FloridaBear]

OP is FUD.

FTFY. That's the only (3 word) sentence that is plausible from that post.

[tobacco123]

Ireland energy consumption in 2013 was 10,825 ktoe = 4.33 x 10¹⁷J
China energy consumption increase between 2009 and 2010 was (2173.5-2068.5)mtce = 105mtce = 3.15 x 10¹⁸J

The energy consumption by bitcoin is really huge and wasteful, but comparing to the "world's factory", it is just about 1/10th of the annual increase in consumption in China.


* toe = tonne of oil equivalent
* tce = tonne of coal equivalent

[philipma1957]

Ireland energy consumption in 2013 was 10,825 ktoe = 4.33 x 10¹⁷J
China energy consumption increase between 2009 and 2010 was (2173.5-2068.5)mtce = 105mtce = 3.15 x 10¹⁸J

The energy consumption by bitcoin is really huge and wasteful, but comparing to the "world's factory", it is just about 1/10th of the annual increase in consumption in China.


* toe = tonne of oil equivalent
* tce = tonne of coal equivalent

thank you for what I was about to type.

Here is another set of facts of btc mining.

     1.300th at .5 watts a gh is 650 watts.  the network is mostly s-7's so we are less then .5 watts  a gh
   13.000th "   "   "      "   "   "  6500 watts
 130.000th "   "   "      "   "   "  65000 watts
 1.30000ph "  "   "      "   "    "  650000  watts
13____________________     6500000 watts or 6.5mega watts
130___________________     65000000 watts or 65 mega watts
1300ph________________     650000000 watts or 650 mega watts  24/7/365

Niagara Falls


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Moses_Niagara_Power_Plant


does 2,525 MW    so about 4x the worlds btc power use.


another fun fact  a typical football stadium with older lighting need 350 kwatts to lit the field.  So  3 or four hours is 1.4megawatts.

So if all sports were done in the daylight worldwide  power savings would be huge far more then BTC burns.

[shinratensei_]

I think that we already have so much extra energy that people don't use, it is better to use it for something good like mining Bitcoin. Banks probably use the same amount of energy as a Bitcoin farm. And there are far less Bitcoin farms compared to banks.

So much extra energy?What do you mean? Average people using non-renewable energy because they rely on their country and if the country using a non-renewable energy. it's will waste the energy.

[afriezalie]

Yeah bitcoin is taking the world energy and make the environment worse because of mass electricity are used for bitcoin transaction and mining. But all the banks also use more electricity to be able to do all the transactions. And then money paper needs many papers and they're from our forest . I think everything in this world needs energy, but we can find a way to reduce the energy consumption with solar power plant that the others said about.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Mining uses more power than a country of 4-5 million people? Each of whom have washing machines, vibrators, Teslas, streetlamps outside their houses, trams and on and on.

I'm sure Bitcoin's carbon footprint is a disgrace considering the tiny number of users, but that seems like an excessive statistic.

Bitcoin uses as much electricity as X vibrators.   Can someone calculate X?

But I suspect that bitcoin will be powered by wind and solar power in the future,  and I'm not worried about it.   Nor about the vibrators.

[Sniper44]

(I think this should go in mining)

There has been a lot of talk on this.  Quite a few good papers
https://karlodwyer.github.io/publications/pdf/bitcoin_KJOD_2014.pdf
From this paper: "Bitcoin mining is comparable to Ireland’s electricity consumption".



As bitcoin grows the amount of energy on the planet is not increasing. Anyone who understands the article, it seems very legitimate to me, discuss,   Yes, I realize the miner wants to reduce cost & cut waste.  Therefore they may seek alternative forms or desire to do so.  Yes, I read about the Hydrofarmer on this very forum.  It is just not the norm with all the major miners around the planet.  Proof of work is expensive. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work

**Title was sarcastic.  But it is still something to think about?

there is already another topic about it here
sarcastic or not, there are a lot of other things that are consuming a lot more power than bitcoin.
the banking system with all these branches which all have a lot of power hungry computers inside are consuming more power than bitcoin.

[tiffyroman]

Mining uses more power than a country of 4-5 million people? Each of whom have washing machines, vibrators, Teslas, streetlamps outside their houses, trams and on and on.

I'm sure Bitcoin's carbon footprint is a disgrace considering the tiny number of users, but that seems like an excessive statistic.

Bitcoin uses as much electricity as X vibrators.   Can someone calculate X?

But I suspect that bitcoin will be powered by wind and solar power in the future,  and I'm not worried about it.   Nor about the vibrators.

This literally made my day LMAO

I've read there are plans to make wind/solar farms dedicated to mining bitcoins in some country. Let me just try to find that article

[Patatas]

Energy can always be converted into one form to another.The electrical waste coming from the industrial and mechanical section is way above the meters compared to the mining industry.That doesn't seem like a problem since we have come up with the alternatives to recycle and conserve energy.If you look at it as an environmental factor,we're literally saving the cost of "fiat money paper" which is made from the trees and is worse. 

[bugsywugsy]

So make a coin where the computational power is put to use - like foldingcoin. But we all know how foldingcoin turned out...

[GreenBits]

So make a coin where the computational power is put to use - like foldingcoin. But we all know how foldingcoin turned out...

Agree with this, all those devices should be put to a better task. also, by simply using renewable sources of energy, and wih the continuing evolution of chip efficiency, this shouldn't be a problem if bitcoin reaches primetime. State actors will provide more efficient mining solutions if necessary.

[pooya87]

there is already a lot of other things that are bad for the environment and they are wasting a lot more energy than bitcoin mining.
besides these mining farms that are mainly mining bitcoin are located in third world countries where they waste a lot of energy and they don't care!

[avikz]

Every new innovation has its positive side as well as negative side. Probably the power consumption is one of the negative factors of bitcoin.

Considering this, alternative energies like solar panel can be used to mine bitcoin. A full time bitcoin earner can install few solar panels at his home and use that power to mine bitcoin. Only one time investment is required for this and the return is life long. Miners should think more seriously about it.

[Patatas]

besides these mining farms that are mainly mining bitcoin are located in third world countries where they waste a lot of energy and they don't care!

Who says ? Get your facts right.See the stats below,most of the full nodes are from the developed countries.Speaking of 3rd world countries and you're not explicitly talking about China,most of them suffer severe energy crises.Electricity is not even distributed to below the average section of the society,forget about wasting it on mining.

[Rubberduckie]

I definitely think people should look to solar.

It may actually get me back into it if I could set up a solar option

energy in california is ridiculous when I missed with 2 S2's it was 800$ a month

[CoinCarrie]

(I think this should go in mining)

There has been a lot of talk on this.  Quite a few good papers
https://karlodwyer.github.io/publications/pdf/bitcoin_KJOD_2014.pdf
From this paper: "Bitcoin mining is comparable to Ireland’s electricity consumption".



As bitcoin grows the amount of energy on the planet is not increasing. Anyone who understands the article, it seems very legitimate to me, discuss,   Yes, I realize the miner wants to reduce cost & cut waste.  Therefore they may seek alternative forms or desire to do so.  Yes, I read about the Hydrofarmer on this very forum.  It is just not the norm with all the major miners around the planet.  Proof of work is expensive. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work

**Title was sarcastic.  But it is still something to think about?

there is already another topic about it here
sarcastic or not, there are a lot of other things that are consuming a lot more power than bitcoin.
the banking system with all these branches which all have a lot of power hungry computers inside are consuming more power than bitcoin.

Your reply was a waste of energy, just like me responding.  Read the thread.  At least individuals are taking tome to add value.  I will stop consuming energy here.  The point is not what are other things consuming power.  Please speak directly about the study, if you understand it.  What is exaggerated or erroneous in your professional opinion?  If you do not care or do not understand, this is a very complex subject. That is fine, you are like most.  What I do not understand - Why bother wasting energy replying?

[CoinCarrie]

I definitely think people should look to solar.

It may actually get me back into it if I could set up a solar option

energy in california is ridiculous when I missed with 2 S2's it was 800$ a month

The miner must reduce cost & cut waste to remain profitable.  However there are 29-40 companies responsible for the majority?  Probably closer to the lower number right?  None of these key actors are looking at alternative energy at this time.  Nor have any announced interest.  If I am wrong and miners relevant on a global scale, who are currently using electricity have openly spoken about a sincere transition - who?  That is not a "dig", me being a jerk.  This stuff is just fascinating to me even if just a hypothetical discussion.  Many people have brought this up, it has been discussed in detail in this forum.  But those using the majority of the compute power, which is estimated to be close to or more than all Google servers (IT IS HUGE), none are seriously thinking about making this change.


Though possibly this will be a competitive advantage for newer individuals to "get in"?

[Carlton Banks]

The whole anthropogenic global warming debate is nothing more than a very smart way of making the people of the world pay government cronies for the right to breathe. Several doomsday scenarios were predicted to have struck midnight by the year 2016, and none of them have come to pass. Natural climate change is much, much more powerful than 0.01% changes in CO² atmospheric composition that burning fossil fuels has contributed; Bitcoin mining compares to the previous 2 factors as an infinitesimally small blip. OP is FUD.

Did you read and understand the research?  The author is hardly a "Nazi environmentalist".  There are other journals out there which suggest the same.  Though they seem to be a little bias.  Which part of the research do you disagree with?

No, I did not. I don't need to: energy might be finite, but it's also pretty abundant. It only really makes sense to start comparing between energy used mining Bitcoin and other large scale utilisations of energy if you make either or both of the following 2 assumptions:

• Energy is scarce
• Anthropogenic climate change is significant

And because neither of those 2 assumptions are valid (and are indeed, easily disproved), any research examining Bitcoin mining from the "uses too much energy" perspective is predicated on false premises. [/thread]

[Btcvilla]

The whole anthropogenic global warming debate is nothing more than a very smart way of making the people of the world pay government cronies for the right to breathe. Several doomsday scenarios were predicted to have struck midnight by the year 2016, and none of them have come to pass. Natural climate change is much, much more powerful than 0.01% changes in CO² atmospheric composition that burning fossil fuels has contributed; Bitcoin mining compares to the previous 2 factors as an infinitesimally small blip. OP is FUD.

Did you read and understand the research?  The author is hardly a "Nazi environmentalist".  There are other journals out there which suggest the same.  Though they seem to be a little bias.  Which part of the research do you disagree with?

No, I did not. I don't need to: energy might be finite, but it's also pretty abundant. It only really makes sense to start comparing between energy used mining Bitcoin and other large scale utilisations of energy if you make either or both of the following 2 assumptions:

• Energy is scarce
• Anthropogenic climate change is significant

And because neither of those 2 assumptions are valid (and are indeed, easily disproved), any research examining Bitcoin mining from the "uses too much energy" perspective is predicated on false premises. [/thread]

Human made and natural climate change is significant and real, were already seeing the effects of it.  But, Bitcoin is not a huge contributor to it, at all. A lot of Bitcoin mines actually use green energy, as green energy is cheaper.

[marcuslong]

(I think this should go in mining)

There has been a lot of talk on this.  Quite a few good papers
https://karlodwyer.github.io/publications/pdf/bitcoin_KJOD_2014.pdf
From this paper: "Bitcoin mining is comparable to Ireland’s electricity consumption".



As bitcoin grows the amount of energy on the planet is not increasing. Anyone who understands the article, it seems very legitimate to me, discuss,   Yes, I realize the miner wants to reduce cost & cut waste.  Therefore they may seek alternative forms or desire to do so.  Yes, I read about the Hydrofarmer on this very forum.  It is just not the norm with all the major miners around the planet.  Proof of work is expensive. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work

**Title was sarcastic.  But it is still something to think about?

Bitcoin is not bad in environment it is bad if all bitcoin miners stop bitcoin mining because theres no big consumer of electricity i think thats bad for community many people will not get their pay for their services if bitcoin miners stopped using bitcoin mining.. So the bad here if they stopped.

[Carlton Banks]

Human made and natural climate change is significant and real, were already seeing the effects of it.  But, Bitcoin is not a huge contributor to it, at all. A lot of Bitcoin mines actually use green energy, as green energy is cheaper.

You're wrong, and dangerously wrong. There is no runaway greenhouse effect, the evidence is plain for everyone to see. Look out of your window.

If you looked out of your window on planets with genuinely massive concentrations of greenhouse gases, you had better make sure that both the glass and the frame of said window are capable of withstanding huge temperature fluctuations and highly corrosive airbourne chemicals. Because of the genuine runaway greenhouse effect such planets expereience because of genuinely high concentrations of greenhouse gases. On those planets.


But we're not on Venus, or Mercury, this is Earth. None of the scare stories will ever come to pass. Not with 0.04% CO². Get a grip, global warming dogmatists. The end goal is to charge you taxes to breathe air outwards. You won't be dragging me down with you.

[Btcvilla]

Human made and natural climate change is significant and real, were already seeing the effects of it.  But, Bitcoin is not a huge contributor to it, at all. A lot of Bitcoin mines actually use green energy, as green energy is cheaper.

You're wrong, and dangerously wrong. There is no runaway greenhouse effect, the evidence is plain for everyone to see. Look out of your window.

If you looked out of your window on planets with genuinely massive concentrations of greenhouse gases, you had better make sure that both the glass and the frame of said window are capable of withstanding huge temperature fluctuations and highly corrosive airbourne chemicals.


But we're not on Venus, or Mercury, this is Earth. None of the scare stories will ever come to pass. Not with 0.04% CO². Get a grip, global warming dogmatists. The end goal is to charge you taxes to breathe air outwards. You won't be dragging me down with you.

You sound like a schizophrenic with a "the government is after me" conspiracy.

You have some of the smartest people in the world, telling you its real, and you need to take action.

However, a lot of people predicting dooms day from it are wrong, very wrong. We won't live to see the full effects. Our children and grand children will be seeing the full effects. People will die from it, but it wont extinct humans. The worse effect from it will be economic, as some of the worlds most important cities are built right by the coast.

[Astermony]

The mining energy is used to protect/secure the bitcoin network. If you consider the energy used by US army to protect the US dollar, that is much more.

[carlisle1]

energy consumption used for bitcoin mining cannot beat the energy consumption used  simultaneously for aircons, refrigerators , washing machine that also has a dryer on it , TVs and a Flat Iron . and it is not bad for the environment i guess what really bad is the Factories that is not disposing their waste properly whether is toxic or not .

[Carlton Banks]

You sound like a schizophrenic with a "the government is after me" conspiracy.

Like I said, you're a highly dangerous individual making such unfounded accusations, that could get the recipient of your "diagnosis" abducted and indefinitely detained; stood upon that eternally solid basis: blind faith and ignorance.... speaking of which:

You have some of the smartest people in the world, telling you its real, and you need to take action.

Having a job title, or letters after your name, or a swimming badge on your swim shorts demonstrates precisely fuck all about your ability within a given field of endeavour.

I don't care if a newspaper or the TV news repeats-repeats-repeats endlessly that "97% of scientists uphold anthropogenic global warming", because (and welcome to the 21st century, by the way) that's how propaganda works on people without an adequate sense of incredulity: very rich people with an agenda to push own corporate media, why would those people want you to believe or know information that's in your interests? Believe that garbage at your own considerable risk.




So, instead of making accusations that seriously risk the freedom and safety of the person you're debating, why don't you come up with some actual arguments, instead of saying "arrest the unbeliever" or "someone who knows something you don't told me that fiction X is real". That's the same kind of arguments that religious people make. And they're equally dangerous and ignorant for the same reason; blind faith.

[irun4fundotca]

I definitely think people should look to solar.

It may actually get me back into it if I could set up a solar option

energy in california is ridiculous when I missed with 2 S2's it was 800$ a month

thats how i do it, athough i plan to upgrade and get more miners where i will take out the inverter and use direct dc from the array after running it through a voltage regulator that can handle the current at the needed volts, right now im wasting energy converting it to ac then dc again
it will reduce the need of server supplies & thats a good thing to save money on setup costs

but the inverter however allows for overnight operation from the battery bank that i plan to upgrade further too then perhaps do away with it all together

[ekoice]

I don't agree with this and I encourage to make every one realize that btcoin is good for environment since it is taking less energy than banks or other factories and it's users send peacefully more time in one place rather than moving here or there and using vehicles and causing pollution thus bitcoin has all plus in it always.

[Btcvilla]

You sound like a schizophrenic with a "the government is after me" conspiracy.

Like I said, you're a highly dangerous individual making such unfounded accusations, that could get the recipient of your "diagnosis" abducted and indefinitely detained; stood upon that eternally solid basis: blind faith and ignorance.... speaking of which:

You have some of the smartest people in the world, telling you its real, and you need to take action.

Having a job title, or letters after your name, or a swimming badge on your swim shorts demonstrates precisely fuck all about your ability within a given field of endeavour.

I don't care if a newspaper or the TV news repeats-repeats-repeats endlessly that "97% of scientists uphold anthropogenic global warming", because (and welcome to the 21st century, by the way) that's how propaganda works on people without an adequate sense of incredulity: very rich people with an agenda to push own corporate media, why would those people want you to believe or know information that's in your interests? Believe that garbage at your own considerable risk.




So, instead of making accusations that seriously risk the freedom and safety of the person you're debating, why don't you come up with some actual arguments, instead of saying "arrest the unbeliever" or "someone who knows something you don't told me that fiction X is real". That's the same kind of arguments that religious people make. And they're equally dangerous and ignorant for the same reason; blind faith.

You make a claim saying its the very rich pushing climate change. The very rich is claiming climate change is not real, so they can continue to profit off of oil. Climate change is not a religion. It is backed by evidence, its been studied for decade's. You sound like someone working for the oil companies, afraid of losing your wealth from oil.

This is the reason why America needs a better education system.

[Carlton Banks]

You make a claim saying its the very rich pushing climate change.

Yep.

The very rich is claiming climate change is not real, so they can continue to profit off of oil. Climate change is not a religion. It is backed by evidence, its been studied for decade's. You sound like someone working for the oil companies, afraid of losing your wealth from oil.

This is the reason why America needs a better education system.

Nope.

The line that big oil are pushing against climate change "science" doesn't hold water, you're clearly totally underestimating exactly the intricate lengths that despots and liars are willing to go to in order to sell a lie, even ordinary people can be fairly sophisticated with the lies they tell (you see that person who owes you some small amount of money? Notice how whenever they see you in the street, they say "I'll have it for you next week!". They're never going to give it to you). 

You've clearly never examined the decades of so-called "evidence", or bothered to wonder whether critical thinking needs to be applied to the work. Everything you've said is not based on any kind of science, and entirely on blind faith in authority views.

So, please, if you have no arguments of your own and only those of others, as I've just demonstrated (that's how evidence works, convincing through demonstration), allow someone who takes an interest in thinking critically to address your side of the "argument".

And last of all, I don't think anyone who can handle basic grammar and punctuation will be able to take your criticism of any technique or institution of education seriously. Let alone those who are capable of thinking for themselves.

[irun4fundotca]

I don't agree with this and I encourage to make every one realize that btcoin is good for environment since it is taking less energy than banks or other factories and it's users send peacefully more time in one place rather than moving here or there and using vehicles and causing pollution thus bitcoin has all plus in it always.

exactly, look at the toner,paper and other consumables that get put back into waste or burn up into the atmosphere, not to mention the processes involved to develop them into the product, every machine (alarm, cctv, cash register, counting machines, door locks, rfid scanners and whater might be used) in banks take for hydro, not to mention the 30 billion dollar head office buildings banks have eating up hydro, made by fossil fuel or nuclear power must ought weigh the costs to mine for the world itself, & i didnt even mention credit unions, or other institutions that can benifit from this technology

[Btcvilla]

You make a claim saying its the very rich pushing climate change.

Yep.

The very rich is claiming climate change is not real, so they can continue to profit off of oil. Climate change is not a religion. It is backed by evidence, its been studied for decade's. You sound like someone working for the oil companies, afraid of losing your wealth from oil.

This is the reason why America needs a better education system.

Nope.

The line that big oil are pushing against climate change "science" doesn't hold water, you're clearly totally underestimating exactly the intricate lengths that despots and liars are willing to go to in order to sell a lie, even ordinary people can be fairly sophisticated with the lies they tell (you see that person who owes you some small amount of money? Notice how whenever they see you in the street, they say "I'll have it for you next week!". They're never going to give it to you).  

You've clearly never examined the decades of so-called "evidence", or bothered to wonder whether critical thinking needs to be applied to the work. Everything you've said is not based on any kind of science, and entirely on blind faith in authority views.

So, please, if you have no arguments of your own and only those of others, as I've just demonstrated (that's how evidence works, convincing through demonstration), allow someone who takes an interest in thinking critically to address your side of the "argument".

And last of all, I don't think anyone who can handle basic grammar and punctuation will be able to take your criticism of any technique or institution of education seriously. Let alone those who are capable of thinking for themselves.

Climate change is not blind faith.

Blind faith is not taking any action, despite the evidence of climate change. Next thing your going to tell me is that the earth is flat.

I'm going to ignore you now since I don't really enjoy seeing a schizophrenic conspiracy theorist showing up in every thread.

[rizzlarolla]

Yep.

Blind faith is not taking any action, despite the evidence of climate change. Next thing your going to tell me is that the earth is flat.
I'm going to ignore you now since I don't really enjoy seeing a schizophrenic conspiracy theorist showing up in every thread.

Only if Core tell him the earth is flat.

[Carlton Banks]

Lol zero evidence and zero capacity to provide rational arguments, much less scientific arguments (and that's what the debate's supposed to even be about, remember? lol)

And let's not forget your repetition of your dangerous claim that I have a psychiatric condition; is this how you always deal with people you lose arguments with, attempt to get them arrested? You're a disgrace of a human being, and a poor ambassador for your non-scientific opinions on climate science.

Foolish blind followers like you have rendered representative democracy null and void, because when 50.1% of people can back moronic top-down totalitarian ideas like anthropomorphic climate change, the corporate-fascist EU superstate, or electing Donald Trump, the "aggregated wisdom of the masses" is clearly a bad joke to be inflicted on the minority that can see it all for what it is: sophisticated lies, told by the same old liars.

[Kprawn]

You really think other financial institutions use less electricity than Bitcoin on a daily basis? If you take fiat currencies for instance... The resources to manufacture and to get the raw material to print and

mint coins are already a concern, add to that the servers running to keep the private ledgers going on bank data centers and also every computer and printer being used within the banks.. the lights and

the security equipment etc.. etc.. Bitcoin use far less electricity than any other fiat currency out there. 

[Yakamoto]

Bitcoin is a far better form a money when it comes to the environment than any other form of currency. If you measure the actual energy (in joules, in a physics sense), Bitcoin uses less overall due to the transactions and generation being combined together in one action, mining (and supplementary nodes).

There isn't any gas or coal or oil burned aside from that which generates electricity (which could be further mitigated through fusion energy), as opposed to the machines required to physically mine or print money.

[pinkpanther03]

Yeah bitcoin is taking the world energy and make the environment worse because of mass electricity are used for bitcoin transaction and mining. But all the banks also use more electricity to be able to do all the transactions. And then money paper needs many papers and they're from our forest . I think everything in this world needs energy, but we can find a way to reduce the energy consumption with solar power plant that the others said about.

Agreed, true that it affects our nature by using or taking bitcoins.

[serjent05]

You really think other financial institutions use less electricity than Bitcoin on a daily basis? If you take fiat currencies for instance... The resources to manufacture and to get the raw material to print and

mint coins are already a concern, add to that the servers running to keep the private ledgers going on bank data centers and also every computer and printer being used within the banks.. the lights and

the security equipment etc.. etc.. Bitcoin use far less electricity than any other fiat currency out there.  

Very well said.  This bitcoin hater (not talking about OP) that were afraid of Bitcoin overthrowing them make different nonsense arguments.  They are pointing their fingers to others when they, themselves are the culprit or more guilty.  Throwing accusation to other is the best means of other people to hide what is really the truth  They can't stop BTC in some area, so they are finding other area where they can pin BTC and now, it's the energy used issue. LOL

[Opquar]

I don't agree with this and I encourage to make every one realize that btcoin is good for environment since it is taking less energy than banks or other factories and it's users send peacefully more time in one place rather than moving here or there and using vehicles and causing pollution thus bitcoin has all plus in it always.

I think the banks will use much more energy than the bitcoin. They have many buildings and computer and employees. These all cost energy.

[GreenBits]

What ever happened to that new bitcoin mining technology in India that was supposed to reduce time and power solving blocks? I don't remember the specifics, it made more educated guesses is what I remember gleaning from the article. Was coindesk or one of those.

[Neptunium]

I agree that Bitcoin mining is a waste of energy. There could be much more efficient systems in place.

However, Bitcoin is already so big and accepted it will be a challenge to implement something better. We can't even increase the block size.

[Woshib]

(I think this should go in mining)

There has been a lot of talk on this.  Quite a few good papers
https://karlodwyer.github.io/publications/pdf/bitcoin_KJOD_2014.pdf
From this paper: "Bitcoin mining is comparable to Ireland’s electricity consumption".



As bitcoin grows the amount of energy on the planet is not increasing. Anyone who understands the article, it seems very legitimate to me, discuss,   Yes, I realize the miner wants to reduce cost & cut waste.  Therefore they may seek alternative forms or desire to do so.  Yes, I read about the Hydrofarmer on this very forum.  It is just not the norm with all the major miners around the planet.  Proof of work is expensive. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work

**Title was sarcastic.  But it is still something to think about?

Bitcoins transactions are impossible without miners, who have computers that consume electricity.
But, I think that solution will be found in renewable energy, or something like this.

[BADecker]

Bitcoin is good for the environment... all those natural resources just waiting for someone to buy them in the form of electricity. Also, it helps the economy to keep moving. I mean, there is way more energy around than anyone could think of using. Energy shortage propaganda is simply a demand for higher prices by the suppliers.

[khalid usman]

no absolutly wrong. it is not so i think,

[Barbut]

I searched in google how much electricity btc mining use in the world, and all I found is bunch of unproven theories and calculations.
Can we even calculate how much electricity is made everyday in the world, and how many percents goes on btc mining?  I couldn't find some precise information about that.

[pandalion98]

I searched in google how much electricity btc mining use in the world, and all I found is bunch of unproven theories and calculations.
Can we even calculate how much electricity is made everyday in the world, and how many percents goes on btc mining?  I couldn't find some precise information about that.

I don't think so since anyone can use any kind* of hardware to mine bitcoins. Some may be using a prototype 8nm chip while others may be using a computer being run from a diesel generator.

We can't really estimate it unless we get some numbers from all major manufacturers of mining hardware including graphics card manufacturers.

Then, we have to sort it out to see which ones are actually mining especially for graphics card statistics.

[Enotche]

I think, For Bitcoin working does not require any additional business processes in addition Blockchain. We do not need any documents and employees, burning gasoline on the way to work, and there is no waste, as a result of the turbulent employment office workers. All this makes the carbon footprint of BTC equal to or even lower than that of competing payment systems.

[Carlton Banks]

Do any of the climate scientists in this thread who are actually contemplating the relative "waste" of Bitcoin mining even know what the so-called waste constitutes? i.e. do you know what the miners are doing and why they're doing it? It's fairly evident you cannot while arguing such positions, you know zero about Bitcoin mining, and zero about climate science also. Concerning.

[chineseprancing]

yes maybe. Mining is consuming much energy in the future. But we can use alternative energy like solar panel to reduce the energy consumption of the mining machines.

[abugseuf]

absolutely wrong justify your statement,

[irun4fundotca]

I think, For Bitcoin working does not require any additional business processes in addition Blockchain. We do not need any documents and employees, burning gasoline on the way to work, and there is no waste, as a result of the turbulent employment office workers. All this makes the carbon footprint of BTC equal to or even lower than that of competing payment systems.

where I fully like and support bitcoin and its cost effectiveness
one thing I can think of not related directly to enviornment issues , are the jobs it could also destroy ,it takes people working to create that paper, garbage people to haul and remove it, office workers to run banks, and numerous more in other fields affected, if it was the only means of transaction when moneys involved there probably would be millions more in the unemployment lines

[Joel_Jantsen]

Do any of the climate scientists in this thread who are actually contemplating the relative "waste" of Bitcoin mining even know what the so-called waste constitutes? i.e. do you know what the miners are doing and why they're doing it? It's fairly evident you cannot while arguing such positions, you know zero about Bitcoin mining, and zero about climate science also. Concerning.

Climate Scientists seems to be too mainstream for signature posters.Welcome to Bitcointalk, where there is no mind below average,only human rejects from normal world with high IQ constitute the 90% population of the forum.Matter of fact,bitcoin mining doesn't have an adverse effects on the environment.If it does,so does gaming/data servers/SuperComputing.The logic completely fails here,I may agree with the sound pollution part ,but hey we are in 2016, people are more prone to ear cancer by continues stuffing of ear buds of different shapes playing hardcore lesbian funk bass psy music.

[RobinHoodster]

No I do not think this is true, and by the way what is not bad these days, they are saying everything is wrong for the world but otherwise we cannot even life.

[Enotche]

By the way in the spring, the new cryptocurrency EDRCoin was introduced in the Asian market. A distinctive feature of the EDRC creators call environmentally friendly mining, achieved through the use of solar panels.

Maybe someone knows if mining Bitcoins can move to solar energy? Or the power will not be enough even for a small farm?

[shinratensei_]

(I think this should go in mining)

There has been a lot of talk on this.  Quite a few good papers
https://karlodwyer.github.io/publications/pdf/bitcoin_KJOD_2014.pdf
From this paper: "Bitcoin mining is comparable to Ireland’s electricity consumption".



As bitcoin grows the amount of energy on the planet is not increasing. Anyone who understands the article, it seems very legitimate to me, discuss,   Yes, I realize the miner wants to reduce cost & cut waste.  Therefore they may seek alternative forms or desire to do so.  Yes, I read about the Hydrofarmer on this very forum.  It is just not the norm with all the major miners around the planet.  Proof of work is expensive. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work

**Title was sarcastic.  But it is still something to think about?

To gather bitcoin with a mining way it's can make dangerous for the environment because needs a lot of energy to mining bitcoin, and on some countries in European feel the disadvantages from mining to their environment.

[ObscureBean]

The way I see it if it wasn't Bitcoin draining the energy, it would be something else so why pretend to be righteous? You're still gonna be draining the planet whether you're using a huge amount of energy or just a small amount. I guess for some people it's just about their own peace of mind, nevermind that using less energy doesn't actually resolve the problem. The lesser of two evils right?  

[AGD]

Did somebody yet compare it with the energy that FIAT is wasting in total? No? Why discussing this topic when nobody here (including me) has an idea about the facts?

[el kaka22]

No I do not think this is true, and by the way what is not bad these days, they are saying everything is wrong for the world but otherwise we cannot even life.

It matters to anything, we can not just say bitcoin are going to ruin the world, it is invented to make easy transaction and all other unimaginable advantageous features. My conclusion, it will definitely need for the future generations.

[ShrykeZ]

Renewable energy and Bitcoin go hand in hand as it's only the initial investment of funds to get the renewable energy up and running.

[salmanahmedone]

I think, For Bitcoin working does not require any additional business processes in addition Blockchain. We do not need any documents and employees, burning gasoline on the way to work, and there is no waste, as a result of the turbulent employment office workers. All this makes the carbon footprint of BTC equal to or even lower than that of competing payment systems.

The energy consumed by bitcoins minning is nothing as compared to energy consumed by factories and other industrial sector products. The bitcoin minning needs energy but it is not that it is burden for the environment.

[BitcoinPC]

yes maybe. Mining is consuming much energy in the future. But we can use alternative energy like solar panel to reduce the energy consumption of the mining machines.

Do you think bitcoins consumes that much energy that you need to switch to solar panel energy etc ? I dont think that is the case.  Even most of the mainframe computers and high end Servers consumes more energy that bitcoin minning.

[Viyamore]

I think, For Bitcoin working does not require any additional business processes in addition Blockchain. We do not need any documents and employees, burning gasoline on the way to work, and there is no waste, as a result of the turbulent employment office workers. All this makes the carbon footprint of BTC equal to or even lower than that of competing payment systems.

The energy consumed by bitcoins minning is nothing as compared to energy consumed by factories and other industrial sector products. The bitcoin minning needs energy but it is not that it is burden for the environment.

This is a good statement .energy used by mining bitcoins is less than as said big factories and who waste after creating some things and the chemicals on air ,water and some of ut is bad for our environment .bitcoin is a clean and saves energy so it is good for tge environment.

[asriloni]

yes maybe. Mining is consuming much energy in the future. But we can use alternative energy like solar panel to reduce the energy consumption of the mining machines.

Do you think bitcoins consumes that much energy that you need to switch to solar panel energy etc ? I dont think that is the case.  Even most of the mainframe computers and high end Servers consumes more energy that bitcoin minning.

well I've seen some of my friends mining with his r9 380x vga and it'd take so many electricity compared to normal use,and most of electricity generated with non renewable energy,so,switch to alternative energy is really necessary

[calkob]

Yeah by making a comparison to banking i am almost sure that the banks of the world have a larger impact on the enviroment than bitcoin.  just another deflection to paint bitcoin in a bad light

[lixer]

By the way in the spring, the new cryptocurrency EDRCoin was introduced in the Asian market. A distinctive feature of the EDRC creators call environmentally friendly mining, achieved through the use of solar panels.

Maybe someone knows if mining Bitcoins can move to solar energy? Or the power will not be enough even for a small farm?

Some people may say yes and some people may say no, yes because it takes the world's energy and no because a lot
of people generate income more than they are spending by just mining a bitcoin block.

[pandalion98]

Physical fiat production is so much more energy-intensive than this. It takes more than 1 cent to produce a 1 cent coin.
They take energy and resources at the same time.

Bitcoin, on the other hand, only takes energy. Therefore, it can safely be moved to purely renewable power resources.
Fiat still needs wood and mining to produce paper and coin currency.

[bitcoineverything]

Mining is not forever. Once 21 million bitcoins are already mined, mining will stop. So it could hardly affect world's energy for now.

[pandalion98]

Mining is not forever. Once 21 million bitcoins are already mined, mining will stop. So it could hardly affect world's energy for now.

Oh, no. Mining will still continue, albeit with no block rewards.

The only way for miners to profit would be to take in transaction fees. At that time, I think transactions without a fee will never be confirmed, unless there's a contract to do so.

[neonshium]

Yeah by making a comparison to banking i am almost sure that the banks of the world have a larger impact on the enviroment than bitcoin.  just another deflection to paint bitcoin in a bad light

Of course, a bank investor will say that bitcoin is bad for environment but a bitcoin investor/traders will say it only takes a few of the worlds energy and not almost all the energy. Bitcoin energy needs are not depending on a single source, so it is not a bad IMO.

[eternalgloom]

I think it's just a matter of cost vs benefits. Does Bitcoin give us as a society enough benefits to warrant the energy usage, and I think the answer is 'Yes'.
It's good that there is now a way of transferring money that isn't controlled by big multinationals.

And in the future the energy needed for Bitcoin mining will be less of an issue, when we see more advances in the area of green energy (it becoming very cost effective).

[Carlton Banks]

Does Bitcoin give us as a society enough benefits to warrant the energy usage, and I think the answer is 'Yes'.
It's good that there is now a way of transferring money that isn't controlled by big multinationals.

And in the future the energy needed for Bitcoin mining will be less of an issue, when we see more advances in the area of green energy (it becoming very cost effective).

What if 97% of scientists didn't agree with your reasoning though?

[romero121]

Bitcoin is not at all bad for environment. Only in terms of energy consumption it might be in the last but the innovation had given high security for the users in terms of earning and investment.

[leopard2]

Yes it is consuming a lot of electricity.

Now the thing is, that fiat currency (debt based money, exponentially growing due to compound interest) forces every economy on the planet to grow continuously.

This growth is required in order to offset the growth of the monetary base.

In other words, if the total value of goods and services in an economy grows slower than the monetary base, price increase (falsely named inflation) will destroy the peoples buying power and savings. Hyperinflation and (civil) war is the end result. Current example is Venezuela. Older examples are the World Wars.

The electricity consumption of Bitcoin is nothing compared to the insane forced economic growth that results in much more ecologic destruction.

Birth control and a different money system will save the planet.

Cheers
Leo

(I think this should go in mining)

There has been a lot of talk on this.  Quite a few good papers
https://karlodwyer.github.io/publications/pdf/bitcoin_KJOD_2014.pdf
From this paper: "Bitcoin mining is comparable to Ireland’s electricity consumption".



As bitcoin grows the amount of energy on the planet is not increasing. Anyone who understands the article, it seems very legitimate to me, discuss,   Yes, I realize the miner wants to reduce cost & cut waste.  Therefore they may seek alternative forms or desire to do so.  Yes, I read about the Hydrofarmer on this very forum.  It is just not the norm with all the major miners around the planet.  Proof of work is expensive. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work

**Title was sarcastic.  But it is still something to think about?

[X-ray]

By the way in the spring, the new cryptocurrency EDRCoin was introduced in the Asian market. A distinctive feature of the EDRC creators call environmentally friendly mining, achieved through the use of solar panels.

Maybe someone knows if mining Bitcoins can move to solar energy? Or the power will not be enough even for a small farm?

Some people may say yes and some people may say no, yes because it takes the world's energy and no because a lot
of people generate income more than they are spending by just mining a bitcoin block.

What?it's just for income?When they want to take care of their environment. Well, The country needs hard work to save their environment. It's too difficult to save our environment .

[Labumi]

Bitcoin is not at all bad for environment. Only in terms of energy consumption it might be in the last but the innovation had given high security for the users in terms of earning and investment.

Yes, it was only for the use of the bitcoin in internet. However, for the use of the bitcoin in terms of mining, I think it would be bad for the environment, for mining bitcoin requires considerable electrical energy and it will increasingly grow in line with the more difficult it is to mine the bitcoin. But it will have no effect when there is the best innovation in mining

[bitcoineverything]

Mining is not forever. Once 21 million bitcoins are already mined, mining will stop. So it could hardly affect world's energy for now.

Oh, no. Mining will still continue, albeit with no block rewards.

The only way for miners to profit would be to take in transaction fees. At that time, I think transactions without a fee will never be confirmed, unless there's a contract to do so.

Oh! OK I get it. Miners are the ones confirming transactions. So mining will still continue..

[crairezx20]

I think the effect of mining is to increase the hot of the places.. This is the only i think the effect of asic miners the more power consumption the more hot you will get in your places..  unless if you have an aircon..

[Jasad]

(I think this should go in mining)

There has been a lot of talk on this.  Quite a few good papers
https://karlodwyer.github.io/publications/pdf/bitcoin_KJOD_2014.pdf
From this paper: "Bitcoin mining is comparable to Ireland’s electricity consumption".



As bitcoin grows the amount of energy on the planet is not increasing. Anyone who understands the article, it seems very legitimate to me, discuss,   Yes, I realize the miner wants to reduce cost & cut waste.  Therefore they may seek alternative forms or desire to do so.  Yes, I read about the Hydrofarmer on this very forum.  It is just not the norm with all the major miners around the planet.  Proof of work is expensive. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work

**Title was sarcastic.  But it is still something to think about?

lets disscuss about effect of bitcoin and money to environment life cycle,we know bitcoin spent many power with electricity based,and mine bitcoin of course take not small amount of power,its why bitcoin mining should not become a self own,i think better if group or team who legally can mine bitcoin.

[ayesha sadiqa]

i think every one has its own thinking. but for me i dont think that it is a fact. bitcoin is too good for environment. i think

[Junko]

Compared to all the different forms of pollution in all the world including, carbon emissions, industrial waste, garbage, etc, etc, I would think bitcoin ranks low on the list. The same as far as energy consumption goes. I think much more energy is wasted from billions of people doing other less productive activities such as playing online video games, streaming videos, watching television all day and night, talking and texting on their phones and the list goes on and on.

[a7mos]

bitcoin miners uses electricity which can be produced from renewable resources like solar panels and wend. so It does not pollute the earth at all. the electricity is not going to increase in the future because i think the mining difficulty will go down because more people will abandon mining

[upsidedown75]

Bitcoin is not at all bad for environment. Only in terms of energy consumption it might be in the last but the innovation had given high security for the users in terms of earning and investment.

Bitcoin is quite a lot better than physical cash with respect to the environment, in my opinion. Taking up a small percentage of world energy is actually better than cutting down trees to make paper money and killing the lands and mining ores for making coins.

[irun4fundotca]

Bitcoin is not at all bad for environment. Only in terms of energy consumption it might be in the last but the innovation had given high security for the users in terms of earning and investment.

Bitcoin is quite a lot better than physical cash with respect to the environment, in my opinion. Taking up a small percentage of world energy is actually better than cutting down trees to make paper money and killing the lands and mining ores for making coins.

except money in bill format is made from cotton and linen fibers

[Gleb Gamow]

(I think this should go in mining)

There has been a lot of talk on this.  Quite a few good papers
https://karlodwyer.github.io/publications/pdf/bitcoin_KJOD_2014.pdf
From this paper: "Bitcoin mining is comparable to Ireland’s electricity consumption".



As bitcoin grows the amount of energy on the planet is not increasing. Anyone who understands the article, it seems very legitimate to me, discuss,   Yes, I realize the miner wants to reduce cost & cut waste.  Therefore they may seek alternative forms or desire to do so.  Yes, I read about the Hydrofarmer on this very forum.  It is just not the norm with all the major miners around the planet.  Proof of work is expensive. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work

**Title was sarcastic.  But it is still something to think about?

Does that mean as the world's population grows there'll be less energy per each of us? Or just for the Irish?

[el kaka22]

-snip-
Does that mean as the world's population grows there'll be less energy per each of us? Or just for the Irish?

I think it is just for the Irish, and we can not deny the fact that bitcoin is a big help to the online community who wants to earn and make profit online. But I will stand for my belief that bitcoin is not bad for the environment compared other industry pollution.

[macwika]

-snip-
Does that mean as the world's population grows there'll be less energy per each of us? Or just for the Irish?

I think it is just for the Irish, and we can not deny the fact that bitcoin is a big help to the online community who wants to earn and make profit online. But I will stand for my belief that bitcoin is not bad for the environment compared other industry pollution.

As difficulty is increasing day by day, more and more electricity is being used in mining, which could have been used for powering the rural areas, so i think that it is harming the nature and we should probably fork it to like POS maybe which would be a really nice solution to this problem!!

[n691309]

Yeah bitcoin is taking lots of power energy of the world, somewhere it is very cheap and somewhere costs a lot, but we can say that because of bitcoin many people have been employed on maintaining those mining rigs in their mining farms. It is not bad for environment as fabrics.

[katrimans]

-snip-
Does that mean as the world's population grows there'll be less energy per each of us? Or just for the Irish?

I think it is just for the Irish, and we can not deny the fact that bitcoin is a big help to the online community who wants to earn and make profit online. But I will stand for my belief that bitcoin is not bad for the environment compared other industry pollution.

As the worlds population grows the energy have been less per each of us but there are so many ways to make energy like solar energy and wind farm or wind power just to make energy and save some energy. We must not blame bitcoin that it takes the worlds energy, cause bitcoin is a big help to lot of people.

[Daneric]

Considering the amount of electricity needed in mining, one can say that bitcoin is using a lot of energy. considerations should be made in using renewable energy in bitcoin mining. relying on fossil fuels for electricity generation will not help much. Other forms of energy such as solar wind and even wave energy ( to be generated from sea waves) can be a very good alternative to help in bitcoin mining.

[cluit]

-snip-
Does that mean as the world's population grows there'll be less energy per each of us? Or just for the Irish?

I think it is just for the Irish, and we can not deny the fact that bitcoin is a big help to the online community who wants to earn and make profit online. But I will stand for my belief that bitcoin is not bad for the environment compared other industry pollution.

As the worlds population grows the energy have been less per each of us but there are so many ways to make energy like solar energy and wind farm or wind power just to make energy and save some energy. We must not blame bitcoin that it takes the worlds energy, cause bitcoin is a big help to lot of people.

Bitcoin can never be bad for the environment. It is not only helping for global financial development but also helping for the development of the society. Yeah can be said gamboling sites are ruining people and indirectly our society.

[yenxz]

Yeah bitcoin is taking lots of power energy of the world, somewhere it is very cheap and somewhere costs a lot, but we can say that because of bitcoin many people have been employed on maintaining those mining rigs in their mining farms. It is not bad for environment as fabrics.

agree with that,we can't mentioned that bitcoin bad for environment, i think paper money more bad for environment by consuming papper that made from wood,and wood has been cuted off illegally for it.

[irun4fundotca]

Yeah bitcoin is taking lots of power energy of the world, somewhere it is very cheap and somewhere costs a lot, but we can say that because of bitcoin many people have been employed on maintaining those mining rigs in their mining farms. It is not bad for environment as fabrics.

agree with that,we can't mentioned that bitcoin bad for environment, i think paper money more bad for environment by consuming papper that made from wood,and wood has been cuted off illegally for it.

that was back in the day , now they use cotton and wool, some new stuff use a polymer where its clear

[2double0]

It is somewhat true that bitcoin is consuming lots of energy in order to get mined and run its network, but there are alternatives too that are being developed daily to minimize this consumption and give more production in less energy.

[StoreBit]

It is somewhat true that bitcoin is consuming lots of energy in order to get mined and run its network, but there are alternatives too that are being developed daily to minimize this consumption and give more production in less energy.

but i dont think so that it will consume such a large amount of energy that will be question mark. i i will consume a negligible amount of energy for mining and even all the website.