Debunking the waste of energy argument against Bitcoin

[Samarkand]

I´m tired of hearing the argument "but Bitcoin wastes more energy than
a whole country..." all over the mainstream media.

Here are a few reasons why the energy that is consumed by Bitcoin mining is not wasted:
1. The energy that is consumed by Bitcoin mining is the foundation of the security of the network
2. Proof-of-work is superior to other consensus algorithms like Proof-of-Stake and offers less attack vectors
3. Fiat currencies are supposedly backed by the power of the state... meanwhile the US military consumes more energy than Bitcoin mining per year
(this is a comparison of the military of a single country compared to a truly global currency)
4. No one is talking about the enormous costs of transporting fiat money, securing it and printing it in the first place
5. The mining of other commodities is extremely energy-intensive as well

If you take all these factors into account, Bitcoin may actually be less energy-intensive than traditional
fiat currencies. Besides, many mining companies have set up their operations in countries with an abundance
of renewable energies like Canada or Iceland. The days where Bitcoin was solely mined in rural Mongolia and China
may finally be behind us.

[Lucius]

I´m tired of hearing the argument "but Bitcoin wastes more energy than
a whole country..." all over the mainstream media.

Here are a few reasons why the energy that is consumed by Bitcoin mining is not wasted:
1. The energy that is consumed by Bitcoin mining is the foundation of the security of the network
2. Proof-of-work is superior to other consensus algorithms like Proof-of-Stake and offers less attack vectors
3. Fiat currencies are supposedly backed by the power of the state... meanwhile the US military consumes more energy than Bitcoin mining per year
(this is a comparison of the military of a single country compared to a truly global currency)
4. No one is talking about the enormous costs of transporting fiat money, securing it and printing it in the first place
5. The mining of other commodities is extremely energy-intensive as well

If you take all these factors into account, Bitcoin may actually be less energy-intensive than traditional
fiat currencies. Besides, many mining companies have set up their operations in countries with an abundance
of renewable energies like Canada or Iceland. The days where Bitcoin was solely mined in rural Mongolia and China
may finally be behind us.

These stories that BTC causes enormous electricity consumption come from those who oppose the whole idea of decentralized currency.By some data bitcoin mining is using only 0.22% of total electricity consumption and that's comparable with Singapore EC in one year.But some say that it is big number and that we should be concerned due to a bigger increase in the future.

It would be interesting to see how much electricity is consumed by all world banks,other financial institutions,money printing and so on.I bet it is much more then what bitcoin mining is using today.I think that energy needs are becoming greater every day,but renewable energy sources are still very poorly utilized in the present time.

It would be really good to connect bitcoin and renewable energy sources-decentralized currency on green energy

[Beerwizzard]

Such arguments of mainstreem medias and freens always were pretty funny. They usually start from the energy consumprion of Bitcoin and end somewhere at conclusions that BTC is killing pandas, causes a global warming and takes electricity from the poor african kids. I think that those people should ask themselves a question who da hell is lacking of electricity in the 21st century? For those people who realy don't have access to electricity it is not the problem of cryptocurrencies. The electricity consumption of the whole planet is growing each year but it is not a problem people should care about (especially right now).

[jseverson]

You make great points, and I completely agree, but the true problem lies within the general public who will consume the news piece -- they're not going to care.

This is yet another issue that could be sensationalized, and those aren't good for Bitcoin as a whole. Green groups are going to fixate on the cons, and with enough traction, could cause government regulators to step in. It's not a problem now, but it could be in the future.

[glub0x]

I always wonder if those poeple would say the same thing to guy paid to drive a armored car to move funds from A to B, and risk his life every day.

"Hey honey, you are doing a pretty useless job. Also, it is an extreme waste of energy"

[dothebeats]

The thing is these people still deem fiat as gods of modern banking and finance without knowing that their valued USD isn't backed by gold since the 70's. That is why these people think that any energy spent on something unusual or bizarre is worthless, unless it can directlt be exchanged into their dollars. Average people won't care much about bitcoin jargons, PoW algorithm or security tied within bitcoin through the process of mining; they only care about the value of the coin and any other information aside from that is worthless and can just go. Stupid thing is, they don't realize that USD don't have any intrinsic value anymore since the 70s, and any efforts made by the government to produce it is just a waste of energy as well.

[Toxic2040]

I´m tired of hearing the argument "but Bitcoin wastes more energy than
a whole country..."

Most of it has to due with lack of education about what it takes to secure a PoW blockchain and why you would want to. I think basic laws of conservation and thermodynamics will point the way forward. Miner swarms will be placed in LEO's and will be powered via solar energy. Ground based farms will also be powered via microwave transmissions sent from the orbital solar arrays. It will take awhile..but we will get there.


*edit*

https://youtu.be/lp5Yx34SO58?t=19m28s

[Samarkand]

The thing is these people still deem fiat as gods of modern banking and finance without knowing that their valued USD isn't backed by gold since the 70's. That is why these people think that any energy spent on something unusual or bizarre is worthless, unless it can directlt be exchanged into their dollars. Average people won't care much about bitcoin jargons, PoW algorithm or security tied within bitcoin through the process of mining; they only care about the value of the coin and any other information aside from that is worthless and can just go. Stupid thing is, they don't realize that USD don't have any intrinsic value anymore since the 70s, and any efforts made by the government to produce it is just a waste of energy as well.

I wholeheartedly agree with your post even though it is kind of sad how clueless
most people are with regard to their precious fiat currency of choice.

However, I wonder if this will always be the case. How long can the average person
ignore the fact that Bitcoin is superior to their fiat currency in terms of security and
especially in terms of securing purchasing power for the long-term?

Purchasing power of the $ over the last century (provided by the St. Louis FED):


https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=iuIe

We all know how the Bitcoin chart of the last 9-10 years looks in comparison.

If we assume that we are still in the early days of Bitcoin it is to be expected that
more and more people have to see the value in it when the purchasing power of
1 Bitcoin always rises in the long-term while the purchasing power of 1 $ always decreases
in the long-term.

[Jacques_Bittard]

I´m tired of hearing the argument "but Bitcoin wastes more energy than
a whole country..." all over the mainstream media.

Here are a few reasons why the energy that is consumed by Bitcoin mining is not wasted:
1. The energy that is consumed by Bitcoin mining is the foundation of the security of the network
2. Proof-of-work is superior to other consensus algorithms like Proof-of-Stake and offers less attack vectors
3. Fiat currencies are supposedly backed by the power of the state... meanwhile the US military consumes more energy than Bitcoin mining per year
(this is a comparison of the military of a single country compared to a truly global currency)
4. No one is talking about the enormous costs of transporting fiat money, securing it and printing it in the first place
5. The mining of other commodities is extremely energy-intensive as well

If you take all these factors into account, Bitcoin may actually be less energy-intensive than traditional
fiat currencies. Besides, many mining companies have set up their operations in countries with an abundance
of renewable energies like Canada or Iceland. The days where Bitcoin was solely mined in rural Mongolia and China
may finally be behind us.

1. It is an inefficient system for security. PoS and newer solutions solve the same problem with a lot less energy.
2. You are claiming that PoW is more superior without offering an explanation.
3. You are using whataboutism, that is one of the low forms of demagogy. You are trying to compare the incomparable to put something into a better light. Please read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
4. Again you are comparing the incomparable.
5. Again you are comparing the incomparable.

If you want to compare bitcoin to something, then use other cryptoassets. And yes ASSETS not CURRENCIES. There isn't a single proper cryptoCURRENCY out there. The main thing that makes a quality currency is value stabilization. That the flow of currency is regulated in a way that it's value is predictable for the future years to come. This enables the economy to actually use finance as a practical tool. Without a stable value currency, it's impossible to calculate any projects that are larger then opening a lemonade stand. Bitcoin and any other crypto for that mater, still lack any mechanism for price stability. I hope that we will see some development with this in the future, but currently it is as it is. Because of this, cryptos are currently useless as currencies. Every business that "accepts bitcoin", actually still accepts FIAT through bitpay or similar service. Bitcoin is just a temporal payment solution started with marketing, not financial goals.
If you want cryptos to actually become currencies, and actually offer competition to central banking, create a system that actually does the same thing as central banks do - regulate the flow of money so that it's value will be predictable. Then you can actually calculate a business plan that's numbers wont change their value 50% in a week.

[zby]

I´m tired of hearing the argument "but Bitcoin wastes more energy than
...
3. Fiat currencies are supposedly backed by the power of the state... meanwhile the US military consumes more energy than Bitcoin mining per year
(this is a comparison of the military of a single country compared to a truly global currency)

Yeah - I am waiting for the USA to replace their army by a bitcoin mining rig.

[Pursuer]

every argument that I have heard so far regarding this supposed "waste of energy" has been with the assumption that bitcoin is useless and was trying to make the conclusion that bitcoin should not continue to exist in long term.
practically there is no difference between this argument and simply calling bitcoin "fraud" like what JP Morgan did recently. and their motives and fear about bitcoin are perfectly clear...

but the fact is, as bitcoin provides a useful currency, or a payment system in a decentralized way that people want and are using, that warrants any kind of power consumption that it may have.

[eaLiTy]

I liked some of the views shared here . First and foremost everyone knows that bitcoin mining is an expensive procedure and it consumes a lot of energy, not like printing fiat currency  , this one point is more than enough to shut down people who complaint about the high price valuation of bitcoin and predicts it will go down to zero.

[timerland]

I´m tired of hearing the argument "but Bitcoin wastes more energy than
a whole country..." all over the mainstream media.

Here are a few reasons why the energy that is consumed by Bitcoin mining is not wasted:
1. The energy that is consumed by Bitcoin mining is the foundation of the security of the network
2. Proof-of-work is superior to other consensus algorithms like Proof-of-Stake and offers less attack vectors
3. Fiat currencies are supposedly backed by the power of the state... meanwhile the US military consumes more energy than Bitcoin mining per year
(this is a comparison of the military of a single country compared to a truly global currency)
4. No one is talking about the enormous costs of transporting fiat money, securing it and printing it in the first place
5. The mining of other commodities is extremely energy-intensive as well

If you take all these factors into account, Bitcoin may actually be less energy-intensive than traditional
fiat currencies. Besides, many mining companies have set up their operations in countries with an abundance
of renewable energies like Canada or Iceland. The days where Bitcoin was solely mined in rural Mongolia and China
may finally be behind us.

There are entire countries that are basically dedicated to the mining industry, to get gold and silver or other commodities.

Fiat currency printing presses are running 24/7 as well.

People act like that energy is the primary argument for not investing or adopting bitcoin. But then they proceed to waste energy in their own homes. For sure, this energy use can be optimized, but people have been exaggerating it and also been using it as an argument against bitcoin. Which I personally think doesn't affect the world as much as they think it does.

[MNDan]

I'll just leave this here - no further discussion required...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2T0OUIW89II

[omonuyak]

Bitcoin is highly energy less intensive and compare to what come out of the mining and transactions confirmation activities I don't think Bitcoin waste a lot of energy. I will advise our government to do more research on the opposite side of crypto currencies instead of looking for the limitations side of the crypto currencies.

[Toxic2040]

I'll just leave this here - no further discussion required...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2T0OUIW89II

/t

+1 WOsMerit

[aardvark15]

I´m tired of hearing the argument "but Bitcoin wastes more energy than
a whole country..." all over the mainstream media.

Here are a few reasons why the energy that is consumed by Bitcoin mining is not wasted:
1. The energy that is consumed by Bitcoin mining is the foundation of the security of the network
2. Proof-of-work is superior to other consensus algorithms like Proof-of-Stake and offers less attack vectors
3. Fiat currencies are supposedly backed by the power of the state... meanwhile the US military consumes more energy than Bitcoin mining per year
(this is a comparison of the military of a single country compared to a truly global currency)
4. No one is talking about the enormous costs of transporting fiat money, securing it and printing it in the first place
5. The mining of other commodities is extremely energy-intensive as well

If you take all these factors into account, Bitcoin may actually be less energy-intensive than traditional
fiat currencies. Besides, many mining companies have set up their operations in countries with an abundance
of renewable energies like Canada or Iceland. The days where Bitcoin was solely mined in rural Mongolia and China
may finally be behind us.

Those are all excellent points including a couple I had not thought of before. One additional point is that as new and better cryptocurrencies come out, there will be many that are faster and use less energy. My point is that Bitcoin is just the first step in the cryptocurrency economy and even though it is currently the biggest one, it is only a small part of this new technology.

[bucciarati]

I´m tired of hearing the argument "but Bitcoin wastes more energy than
a whole country..." all over the mainstream media.

Here are a few reasons why the energy that is consumed by Bitcoin mining is not wasted:
1. The energy that is consumed by Bitcoin mining is the foundation of the security of the network
2. Proof-of-work is superior to other consensus algorithms like Proof-of-Stake and offers less attack vectors
3. Fiat currencies are supposedly backed by the power of the state... meanwhile the US military consumes more energy than Bitcoin mining per year
(this is a comparison of the military of a single country compared to a truly global currency)
4. No one is talking about the enormous costs of transporting fiat money, securing it and printing it in the first place
5. The mining of other commodities is extremely energy-intensive as well

If you take all these factors into account, Bitcoin may actually be less energy-intensive than traditional
fiat currencies. Besides, many mining companies have set up their operations in countries with an abundance
of renewable energies like Canada or Iceland. The days where Bitcoin was solely mined in rural Mongolia and China
may finally be behind us.

would add a couple of other points:

a) you can re-use a miner to heat a room or even a building for larger setup
b) in fact you are helping the power net using electricity when it is not saturated

and consider that these two are the first that came mind ...

[sjefdeklerk]

I'll just leave this here - no further discussion required...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2T0OUIW89II

That guy is such a an idiot. "Market arbitrage", REALLY? LOL. And he obviously doesn't understand that energy in some countries is cheap because of politics/taxes instead of lack of demand.

[1Referee]

People act like that energy is the primary argument for not investing or adopting bitcoin. But then they proceed to waste energy in their own homes.

People complaining about Bitcoin's enegry consumption isn't really what I am bothered by. It's high level politicians talking about Bitcoin's energy consumption being an environmental disaster cracking me up. If they even bothered to care about the environment, they would do something about the larger oil corporations literally poisoning and killing everything that is alive, and that on a daily basis. Just look at what Shell is doing in Nigeria. It's going on for years, but no one even cares to sanction Shell. That basically also goes up for Exxon, Shevron, BP, Total, etc. As long as they are willing to pay their 'contributions', no one will even dare to sanction them, that's how things go - corruption is the desicive factor as always.