Is Bitcoin mining currently too energy inefficient for the future?

[DiamondCardz]

This is based on something someone else said to me recently, though I wrote it it doesn't necessarily mean I wholeheartedly agree with what is written, it is more of a debating platform.

For a world which is about to face an enormous threat to civilisation's growth and survival - climate change - the obscene energy usage of Bitcoin miners is a problem. In 2016 Motherboard modelled[1] that, pessimistically, the Bitcoin network could require 14 GW of energy to supply all the miners in action, that is, 14 gigajoules per second or 14 billion joules per second.

For context, 14 gigajoules is - in the UK anyway - equal to just over 16.1 million McDonalds' hamburgers worth of energy per second. That's a lot of hamburgers. (simplified, of course)

The world is already experiencing an exponential growth in population and therefore energy consumption, and energy is already going to limit the future's economic growth[2]. If we want to prevent this happening we need to seriously decrease our global energy consumption, and Bitcoin needs to be a part of this, either through changing the hashing method/protocol or centralisation/regulation (one being more desirable than the other). In addition, Bitcoin mining is generally focused in places where renewable energy is not taking nearly as much of a hold as in developed countries, e.g. Russia, Brazil, China, and so the effect of the energy consumption in those areas is worsened. I couldn't find a reliable source I trust to back that up, however.

What is your response to the question in the title?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1]: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/bitcoin-could-consume-as-much-electricity-as-denmark-by-2020
[2]: https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/61/1/19/303944/Energetic-Limits-to-Economic-Growth

[1715275239]

1715275239

[1715275239]

1715275239

[os2sam]

the obscene energy usage of Bitcoin miners is a problem.

Which is a fraction of the energy used by the worlds current banking system.

[DiamondCardz]

the obscene energy usage of Bitcoin miners is a problem.

Which is a fraction of the energy used by the worlds current banking system.

What Bitcoin would replace in the banking system uses a fraction of the energy of Bitcoin miners. Things like investment banking would still be a thing, you realise? The stock market, all other functions of a bank other than money exchanging, they don't just vanish if Bitcoin goes mainstream.

[unholycactus]

the obscene energy usage of Bitcoin miners is a problem.

Which is a fraction of the energy used by the worlds current banking system.

What Bitcoin would replace in the banking system uses a fraction of the energy of Bitcoin miners. Things like investment banking would still be a thing, you realise? The stock market, all other functions of a bank other than money exchanging, they don't just vanish if Bitcoin goes mainstream.

He was pointing out how small it was in comparison. Not explicitly saying it will replace the current system.
Comparing it to hamburgers is a big weird. If you compare it to actual big energy applications, Bitcoin mining isn't big at all.

Point is, there are many other things you should target to reduce energy consumption before going after Bitcoin mining.

[philipma1957]

To the op. Why not make a post on how to solve overpopulation.  Far more energy is spent due to 8 billion living people. World works fine or just as bad with 3 billion people.

Now if we all practiced showering and oral sex exclusively for five years it would save far. Far far more power then spent by btc.

Btw.  I know my idea is not going to happen.  

I also know that people will continue to spend power mining coins.

Right now less then 1/200 of the worlds power goes to mining coins.

If the world practiced oral sex only for five years quite a few people would not be born.
70
Saving lots of power.

Each day 370000 are Born and each day 155000 die. So we gain. 215000 people a day

That is more then 70 million per year and 350 million in five years

My way. We lose 250 million.  That is a 600 million swing.

So a muff job and blow job a day keep overpopulation away.

[gbBit]

You "model" doesn't take into account the technology increases of the future.  Can you imagine if everyone was still mining on CPUs and how much power that would take?  Of course not because it wouldn't be profitable.  There will be something after ASICs that will address the amount of power consumed since this is the biggest cost to miners currently and the amount of power consumed globally by mining will remain pretty much constant forever.

[fanatic26]

Bitcoin mining or not that energy would be used somewhere. We would be better off creating better ways to produce power. You can reduce reduce reduce all you want but the population expansion and adoption of technology in less civilized areas of the world is not going to slow down.

[os2sam]

We would be better off creating better ways to produce power.

We have the means to generate all the power we need.

Hydroelectric and Nuclear Energy for Power companies.

Solar and Wind for individual home/land owners.

[fanatic26]

We would be better off creating better ways to produce power.

We have the means to generate all the power we need.

Hydroelectric and Nuclear Energy for Power companies.

Solar and Wind for individual home/land owners.

i dont even...

/facepalm

[os2sam]

We would be better off creating better ways to produce power.

We have the means to generate all the power we need.

Hydroelectric and Nuclear Energy for Power companies.

Solar and Wind for individual home/land owners.

i dont even...

/facepalm

What exactly is your issue with what I said?

[fanatic26]

I said we need to create better ways generating electricity.

You list the ways in which we currently generate electricity.

I think you missed the point of what I said by quite a bit.


P.S.

I do like that you picked the most unreliable means of generating energy for the home user market. Unless you live somewhere with 24/7 sunlight and a 100% constant wind I guess it would be ok?

[os2sam]

I said we need to create better ways generating electricity.

You list the ways in which we currently generate electricity.

I think you missed the point of what I said by quite a bit.

Do you have ideas for better ways?

Nuclear Fission technology has moved forward by leaps and bounds and can be much better now.  Nuclear Fusion, as far as I know, is still not feasible.

P.S.

I do like that you picked the most unreliable means of generating energy for the home user market. Unless you live somewhere with 24/7 sunlight and a 100% constant wind I guess it would be ok?

Solar and Wind are great to supplement what the power companies produce and individuals can install this equipment if they choose.  Used in this way they can reduce the load on the power grid and reduce pollutants where electricity is generated by coal.

Solar and wind don't work well as a utility.  Environmentalist are now trying to shut down Wind and Solar furnaces because they are killing birds, I think that is very ironic.

[DiamondCardz]

To the op. Why not make a post on how to solve overpopulation.  Far more energy is spent due to 8 billion living people. World works fine or just as bad with 3 billion people.
-snip-

The hamburgers comparison was not meant to be taken seriously. In the OP, I literally referred to the problem of population growth, so I'm not sure why you are using overpopulation as a point. Our energy resources are already being stretched by overpopulation and your attempt at being witty doesn't cut it. Do you plan to convince people to stop having kids so we can save energy for other things, like Bitcoin?

[philipma1957]

To the op. Why not make a post on how to solve overpopulation.  Far more energy is spent due to 8 billion living people. World works fine or just as bad with 3 billion people.
-snip-

The hamburgers comparison was not meant to be taken seriously. In the OP, I literally referred to the problem of population growth, so I'm not sure why you are using overpopulation as a point. Our energy resources are already being stretched by overpopulation and your attempt at being witty doesn't cut it. Do you plan to convince people to stop having kids so we can save energy for other things, like Bitcoin?

Absolutely not.

BTW  my post while it appears to be a joke is serious.  My method of population reduction is fun.  Much better then wars or disasters. Illness and the lot.

population reduction is far more important then energy spent mining coins.

I will give you a list of bigger energy  wastes.

All sports cars that burn obscene amounts of gas.  they are 10 fold the issue of crypto coin engery.
Worse  all car racing  the amount of fuel burned in one  car race is amazing.
All incandescent light bulbs vs leds.
Insulate every home correctly.  Cheap fast payback.  if the world did this with every home  heating and cooling cost would drop a lot.

Any of the above are easy to do.

And here is a big one  solar engery needs 1 advancement and that would be really good batteries.

BTC and all coins help make development of a really good battery a real goal


http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-22191650

if battery tech steps it up  a few levels solar would be a working system.

[os2sam]

population reduction is far more important then energy spent mining coins.

Not to change the subject, too much.  I recently heard an analysis on population growth based on UN population figures for the year 2150, which are that there will be 9.1 Billion people on the earth.  The thing of that is that 7 Billion of them will be 65 years old and older.  So if that comes to fruition we could have 7 Billion people dying of old age in a 30 to 40 year time span.  At which point we would be far too underpopulated.  Not to mention the burden on the young to support us elderly while we die of old age, hopefully that will still be an option for us in the future, fingers crossed.

[Sr.Urbanist]

For a world which is about to face ... climate change - the obscene energy usage of Bitcoin miners is a problem.

Yes. I agree.  We need to move much more aggressively towards developing clean energy.  Did you know the renewable energy lab in Boulder, CO, has a solar system that converts the sun's heat to energy that can continue the load throughout the night?  It was there in 2008 when I visited. There is a market failure and government needs to act.

Bitcoin is not the problem.  
It's like the saying,
"if you come home to find your wife
being unfaithful to you
 - on the couch -
you don't throw out the couch!"

Not only is China beating us on the development and adoption of BTC, but also solar energy.  They're moving forward and we're looking back  

Contact your Senator and tell them to act now to dramatically bring down the price of CLEAN energy:

https://www.senate.gov/senators/contact/

[coolcoinz]

population reduction is far more important then energy spent mining coins.

Not to change the subject, too much.  I recently heard an analysis on population growth based on UN population figures for the year 2150, which are that there will be 9.1 Billion people on the earth.  The thing of that is that 7 Billion of them will be 65 years old and older.  So if that comes to fruition we could have 7 Billion people dying of old age in a 30 to 40 year time span.  At which point we would be far too underpopulated.  Not to mention the burden on the young to support us elderly while we die of old age, hopefully that will still be an option for us in the future, fingers crossed.

Also with the current climate changes lands around to the equator will become barren wastelands and Africa,, which is already struggling with water shortages will become a desert unable to support life.
I wouldn't worry about overpopulation. People have been preaching doom for years and countries like Russia are offering free land to anyone who would populate their Siberian regions. Still no volunteers.

[Oceat]

To the op. Why not make a post on how to solve overpopulation.  Far more energy is spent due to 8 billion living people. World works fine or just as bad with 3 billion people.

Now if we all practiced showering and oral sex exclusively for five years it would save far. Far far more power then spent by btc.

Btw.  I know my idea is not going to happen.  

I also know that people will continue to spend power mining coins.

Right now less then 1/200 of the worlds power goes to mining coins.

If the world practiced oral sex only for five years quite a few people would not be born.
70
Saving lots of power.

Each day 370000 are Born and each day 155000 die. So we gain. 215000 people a day

That is more then 70 million per year and 350 million in five years

My way. We lose 250 million.  That is a 600 million swing.

So a muff job and blow job a day keep overpopulation away.

That is right. Over populaiton is a bigger problem.

[Sr.Urbanist]

... Africa, which is already struggling with water shortages will become a desert unable to support life.
I wouldn't worry about overpopulation. People have been preaching doom for years ...

Ever read the book Collapse?  It talks about how civilization collapses around the planet from the Vikings to the Maya.  His hypothesis is that places destroyed their environment, ruined partnerships with their allies and turned on themselves.  This often came from short abundance, knowing it was a bad idea, followed with internal fighting and collapse.  

[philipma1957]

population reduction is far more important then energy spent mining coins.

Not to change the subject, too much.  I recently heard an analysis on population growth based on UN population figures for the year 2150, which are that there will be 9.1 Billion people on the earth.  The thing of that is that 7 Billion of them will be 65 years old and older.  So if that comes to fruition we could have 7 Billion people dying of old age in a 30 to 40 year time span.  At which point we would be far too underpopulated.  Not to mention the burden on the young to support us elderly while we die of old age, hopefully that will still be an option for us in the future, fingers crossed.

In 1960s I was a kid.  Say 10 in 1967. We had about 3 billion. We have 7 billion more actually.

In 2050 I will be 93. And I am sure the world will be looking to push me to the other side unless of course I am there already.

I worry more about too many people then not enough power.

But wtf do I know about the real state of the world not much.

My hope is. We don't get a faster icecap melt then predicated .  As that would be pretty fucked up.

I suppose you can argue mining coin would speed the melting.  Or maybe lead to a true battery breakthrough which pretty much ends the energy issue for good.

That desert in Africa could be all solar panels.  And the energy could be stored in breakthrough battery tech.

A battery the size of a car battery made of lite weight metal that holds the energy of 25 card batteries now would mean you could ship it on solar power ships
 From Africa to the rest of the world .

But even if all that works out we would still need room for crops and the like"