[2018-01-29] IMF’s Lagarde Says That Bitcoin Mining Consumes Too Much Electricit

[Hell-raiser]

They are so stupid. Why doesn't the director say something about the electricity being wasted by appliances on standby? Why doesn't she mention the amount of electricity wasted by bank servers processing transactions? What about the computers run by clerks in every single bank branch? Bitcoin eliminates the need for branches, clerks and their computers. If you have people buying electricity and they want more get more them and profit from it instead of complaining!

There is a dispute between climate scientists as to whether increases in CO₂ is the reason for climate change anyway. The climate has changed far more dramatically in the past without 0.01% increases in atmospheric CO₂.

I wasn't even thinking about CO2 as we have many different sources of power with a lot of it being generated by dams and nuclear plants that don't emit it. What i'm talking about is the fact that we are producing more power than we're using. There's no scare of shortages, especially in countries like Canada that are producing far more than they need. All this power is going to waste  because we don't have plants meant to store it. If it's wasted why not allow miners to use it? Why cry about them taking it if they're buying it on the market and paying for it like everybody else?

But how is this ever possible? How can we produce more power than we consume? As far as I know, it is impossible to store electricity directly. You can of course use some processes like electrolysis to decompose, for example, water into oxygen and hydrogen and then store hydrogen but it is more of a sci-fi movie than reality yet. If you actually mean that we can produce more than we now consume, I don't think it justifies mining because it would still be a waste of resources.

[stompix]

But how is this ever possible? How can we produce more power than we consume? As far as I know, it is impossible to store electricity directly. You can of course use some processes like electrolysis to decompose, for example, water into oxygen and hydrogen and then store hydrogen but it is more of a sci-fi movie than reality yet. If you actually mean that we can produce more than we now consume, I don't think it justifies mining because it would still be a waste of resources.

Directly yes, it's almost impossible not because of the technical aspect but the financial one.

But it is done as industrial scale with PSH, (pumped storage hydroelectricity).
We have batteries like this one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_County_Pumped_Storage_Station
14 GWh  .

I'm concerned as to how humans have been consuming non-renewable energy at such a fast rate when renewable energy is not yet a thing.

Bitcoin miners (even in China) are using mostly renewable hydro-electric or geo-thermal energy, because they're the cheapest

As long as China is still burning coal to produce energy it simply means that for each 1000kwh green energy a miner is consuming in some other part of the country something consumes 1000kwh of "dirty" energy.

If the miner stops, then the green energy is distributed to that other consumer and there is no need for the dirty energy. 

[darkangel11]

But how is this ever possible? How can we produce more power than we consume? As far as I know, it is impossible to store electricity directly. You can of course use some processes like electrolysis to decompose, for example, water into oxygen and hydrogen and then store hydrogen but it is more of a sci-fi movie than reality yet. If you actually mean that we can produce more than we now consume, I don't think it justifies mining because it would still be a waste of resources.

Imagine that you have a hydroelectric power plant that produces 1000 MW (has 4 250 MW) turbines and the whole thing is supposed to supply neighboring cities and small towns. The combined use of power during the day is 800 MW, which is the load the power plant constantly working under. Since turning off one turbine would make it drop to 750 it's forced to run all of them constantly, which means that it is producing 1000 MW anyway, even if nobody is using it. It's a common thing worldwide there's always some margin of power that is being supplied but not used. If somebody starts to it will only mean more money for the power company.

[bbc.reporter]

I have seen many known bitcoiners who are considered oracles that have made the wrong arguments concerning proof of work's wasteful use of a limited resource.

Some of their arguments are bitcoin is pushing for the use of renewable energy. What? If there was one that matters then please tell us about it.

Another argument is but the banking system uses more electricity. Ok turn off the whole banking system now. Let us see if bitcoin can handle everything.

Very stupid arguments from supposed to be smart people.

[Hell-raiser]

But how is this ever possible? How can we produce more power than we consume? As far as I know, it is impossible to store electricity directly. You can of course use some processes like electrolysis to decompose, for example, water into oxygen and hydrogen and then store hydrogen but it is more of a sci-fi movie than reality yet. If you actually mean that we can produce more than we now consume, I don't think it justifies mining because it would still be a waste of resources.

Directly yes, it's almost impossible not because of the technical aspect but the financial one.

But it is done as industrial scale with PSH, (pumped storage hydroelectricity).
We have batteries like this one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_County_Pumped_Storage_Station
14 GWh  .

Well, I heard about these pump&dump power stations as a purely theoretical possibility but I didn't know that someone has actually built one of this scale. To me, it is kind of proof of concept. I'm interested in such things so if anyone feels interested too, here's a simple chart which basically outlines the operation of such power station:

But how is this ever possible? How can we produce more power than we consume? As far as I know, it is impossible to store electricity directly. You can of course use some processes like electrolysis to decompose, for example, water into oxygen and hydrogen and then store hydrogen but it is more of a sci-fi movie than reality yet. If you actually mean that we can produce more than we now consume, I don't think it justifies mining because it would still be a waste of resources.

Imagine that you have a hydroelectric power plant that produces 1000 MW (has 4 250 MW) turbines and the whole thing is supposed to supply neighboring cities and small towns. The combined use of power during the day is 800 MW, which is the load the power plant constantly working under. Since turning off one turbine would make it drop to 750 it's forced to run all of them constantly, which means that it is producing 1000 MW anyway, even if nobody is using it. It's a common thing worldwide there's always some margin of power that is being supplied but not used. If somebody starts to it will only mean more money for the power company.

You are right. The turbine continues to rotate when they just "unplug" it if I can say so. But I still maintain that it doesn't justify mining as mostly a waste of electricity even if there are spare capacities. Miners pay for the electricity they consume and from purely economic point of view it's okay but not so as far as efficiency is concerned.

[stompix]

But how is this ever possible? How can we produce more power than we consume? As far as I know, it is impossible to store electricity directly. You can of course use some processes like electrolysis to decompose, for example, water into oxygen and hydrogen and then store hydrogen but it is more of a sci-fi movie than reality yet. If you actually mean that we can produce more than we now consume, I don't think it justifies mining because it would still be a waste of resources.

Imagine that you have a hydroelectric power plant that produces 1000 MW (has 4 250 MW) turbines and the whole thing is supposed to supply neighboring cities and small towns. The combined use of power during the day is 800 MW, which is the load the power plant constantly working under. Since turning off one turbine would make it drop to 750 it's forced to run all of them constantly, which means that it is producing 1000 MW anyway, even if nobody is using it. It's a common thing worldwide there's always some margin of power that is being supplied but not used. If somebody starts to it will only mean more money for the power company.

Load balancing comes into play at that time.
In my country we have them all, nuclear, hydro,gas, sun and wind.
When there is simply too much power generated from free sources gas and coal are turned off.
Then pump storage starts.

Besides, there is nothing "local", and certainly not at that scale. You don't build a 4000 MW hydroelectric plant for the neighborhood, that thing is connected to the grid and might deliver power to god knows what town a thousands miles ways.

[AK47-]

By any metric that wouldn't be true. The misconception that mining becomes harder as more bitcoins are mined is simply untrue. The bitcoin network is designed to adjust the computing difficulty if the number of people mining bitcoin is more or less. And since mining per 10 minute will be halved to 6.25 bitcoin mining will become less profitable with time. Yes, the incentives will increase if bitcoin prices increase but still it's bound to be less profitable, less competitive and less of a burden on the environment.

[Carlton Banks]

Miners pay for the electricity they consume and from purely economic point of view it's okay but not so as far as efficiency is concerned.

I have seen many known bitcoiners who are considered oracles that have made the wrong arguments concerning proof of work's wasteful use of a limited resource.

Some of their arguments are bitcoin is pushing for the use of renewable energy. What? If there was one that matters then please tell us about it.

Another argument is but the banking system uses more electricity. Ok turn off the whole banking system now. Let us see if bitcoin can handle everything.

Very stupid arguments from supposed to be smart people.

Wasting what? Answer: their own money. What makes you think you can tell others what to do with their own money? It's not affecting you, you have no cause for complaint.


The pair of you have not gone to the trouble of finding out why proof of work is used in Bitcoin. Don't be surprised if there's little sympathy for your ill-informed views.

Read this sentence: Bitcoin Proof of Work is providing a valuable service. More is better. See if you can figure out why that's true before you waste everyone's time again (ironically, you wasting everyone's time is a waste that is affecting other people)