Is Bitcoin Mining Really Causing Environmental Damage? Maybe not that much...

[doanlang]

Obviously, as long as mining is still profitable, more and more computers will operate and consume more power. Long-term solutions may not be in the alternative, but with the power itself.

[franky1]

So franky:

firstly. where are you even getting the idea about guy travelling up to 100th floor
where are you getting the idea about energy excersion of me lifting a cup to my lips to drink own pee
where are you getting the idea of pumping water upstream to fill reservoirs...

I never said to pump water up to fill the reservoirs
I was strictly talking about efficiency in your golden example.
Rather than recycling the water that guy will eliminate from the x floor, it's more efficient to let him pee at the entrance than
having the elevator carrying him with the extra weight.

again your mentioning the need for elevators.. meaning water has to go up........ (facepalm)
no, no and no. ill say it one more time
it goes downstream. collect in a second area DOWNSTREAM  and goes down again... there is no up

but instead of stopping the river. using the water once and then let it travel un reused. to just give it to the sea.
the idea is to have more dams downstream to then reuse the water as it travels...DOWNSTREAM

by the way its not a problem of physics.. but cost and bureaucracy of digging holes concreting walls and displacing residents in the way.

Franky, let's stick to the Danube since I've brought this up.
The Danube drops 32 meters from the Iron gates in 1000 km.
You will have to dig 20 times more earth than the Panama canal to create a dam and deepen the river bed to make the water flow to the sea after the new dam. Not even talking about what will happen to the ports water pumping stations that are going to have to lift water from 30 -20 meter deeper for the population

You're going to spend more energy doing that than the powerplant will produce in a millennium

yea you brought up a river thats a crap example and one we both agree is not supportive of such due to cost.
you said it above and you quoted me as i show below. that its about politics and costs and that it would affect the population.. which the electricity demand for the area is not high enough to sway the argument to change that... so why mention the danube.. it has nothing to do with bitcoin mining or hydropower to power bitcoin mining.
no one would be foolish to set up a mining farm in that area..

the reason the danube doesnt have more dams is because politicians wont allow it as it then stops boats travelling upstream
it seems transporting goods up river is more important then making walls to make electricity down river

You're not familiar with how things are in Europe. 
The Canal de la Marne au Rhin has no more than 154 locks, one every 2 km 

i am familiar..
im in the UK we have hundreds of canals and thousands of canal locks.. the stupid thing you dont see is you cant use a dam as a 'lock'
a dam is a dam and a lock is a lock. if your going to dam a river you dam a river. boats cant go up
so the only time you dam a river is if the demand for electric outweight the public need for an open river

Switching to hashrate

now if the price goes down below the $6k he is paying.. he actually thinks.. well there is no point buying new equipment this week. but i can buy btc on the market below $6k. and actually turn off some rigs. meaning they can renegotiate the electric allotment they have not used this week. to be allowed to be used at the 53rd week

now if the price rises. they are not forced to do anything... they can all just mine at the same rate. and spend their profits investing in other businesses (yep they do that)
or replace thir rigs with less costly equipment. so that they can let the energy companies give them a few extra weeks extension at the end of the year because they didnt need to use it during the year...

Everything is right if we consider this a close game.
But when the price goes up, so does the number of miners, which start with new equipment and new costs.

nope. it does not play out as short term minded as you think
i know your thinking when the price jumped to $20k from novembers lower rate.. that the hashrate must have jumped 3-4fold
no
here ill show you. no spike in december 2017 from
btc.com https://data.bitcoinity.org/bitcoin/hashrate/2y?mining_pool=BTC.com&t=a
btc.top https://data.bitcoinity.org/bitcoin/hashrate/2y?mining_pool=BTC.TOP&t=a
antpool https://data.bitcoinity.org/bitcoin/hashrate/2y?mining_pool=AntPool&t=a

now. here is the thing. the pools above are the main pools that think long term and progress at a periodic growth and when prices go up they dont ramp up more machines 4x and then ramp down just as fast.
Eg the dont ramp up 4x december and ramp down 4x in spring 2018

they make profit and spread it across the year and then progress over the year.
..

now look at these short term pools. you know the ones that now laughingly only have 1% of network hash who are small minded and dont play "the game"
https://data.bitcoinity.org/bitcoin/hashrate/2y?mining_pool=BTCC+Pool&t=a
as you can see they did foolishly sheep follow the price. ..
and if you were to rmeember last year btcc was one of the big names. now its only 1% of network hashpower.
they switched off too many rigs. sold of too many coins in january and then bought too many rigs in january. tried t run them too soon. and by march they had to drop down their rigs again by march
(facepalm) thus now they are stuck with rigs left to gather dust. and no spare cashflow to play any games with..

yea the recent news that bitmain is in trouble is actually that btcc are in trouble.
bitmain are happy spending money in investing in other companies while btcc is closing down business.. as i said btcc is now in the 1% bracket.

if mining is at a 43terrahash month minimum.. ($5800 at per btc mining COST) (i done the math it works out. its in my post history if your bored)

If you really have said something like this....I'm starting to feel disappointed.
You've calculated the costs per BTC? Common!!!

then knowing the btc PRICE is only a bit above that..  so in your mindset. miners in december should have been mining at 120terrahash. because PRICES were 3x so hashrate could/would/should have been 3X 'because they could afford to'

sorry but no. it dont work like that.

you will see miners in the MAJORITY only increase 5-10% as a planned periodic growth. if bitcoin went to $1m a coin in under 2 years. you wont see mining pools jump to network hash of 6.6zetahash overnight (using the metrics of this generations ASICs)($900k)

It didn't because there wasn't any miner left to be sold and added to the network.
Price for miners jumped to even 3000$ for a used s9 first generation in December.
If the price goes x10 in a week miners will not be able to add new gear even if they wanted to, mining equipment is not bread, hasn't the last video card shortage taught you that?

lol im laughing
you should be a comedian

you do know bitmain make them right.

i explained above bitmain and the smart pools play the long game.. its actually BTCC that played the short game buying up rigs and then getting face slapped because they ramped up mining too fast due to december.
- hashrate charts dont lie.-

as i said. its stupid that when you make profit. to spend all your profit just to work harder.. btcc learned that the hard way

where as bitmain that have no ASIC shortage and COULD HAVE ramped up their hashrate in december. but they didnt. they played the long game.

anyway.. the bigger point is not about the ATH but sustaining the LOW which sits above $5800

anyway nice talking to you, enjoyed your diverted comments about rivrs unrelated to mining and the comedy of you thinking water has to go uphill via lifting cups of pee or using elevator analogies.. was real funny you cant grasp the concept of down stream...

but great comedy any.. have a nice day

[franky1]

..... anyway. now that comedy sidetrack is now pushed aside..

bitcoin mining does cost money. yes. and thats what backs up a baseline value.(im not talking about speculative volitile ATH price.. im talking baseling (bottomline) value)
EG if gold mining was free gold purchasing would be cheap

at the moment bitcoin mining does not eat into needed demand of residents. it actually buys the EXCESS (above demand) that power stations produced that just goes to waste if not bought.

power stations love it.

as for asics

in late november the math of cost of mining was exa * 277
in mrch-june. it came down to exa*135
and as of october-november it will be exa *65

thats because the cost of the rig and the electric. and the hashrate of the rig change per batch and generation

in october new asics are coming out which have twice the hashrate. the rigs will cost a bit more but thats offset by the reduction in electric used. thus balancing out. .. but effectively being 2x more efficient

[Al-e_x]

Yes, the world of mining requires a lot of electricity, I think that solar panels can be a solution to save electricity.

This solar panel can be an alternative source of crypto mining energy that is more environmentally friendly, but the price is not cheap. so very rare for miners to use it.

[hakertajniak]

Bitcoin mining is consuming much electricity indeed, but it won't damage our environment as long the power resource for electricity is eco-friendly.
There are many industries that can causing more harm for environment than bitcoin. So i think crypto mining is not bad for environment

[stompix]

yea you brought up a river thats a crap example and one we both agree is not supportive of such due to cost.
you said it above and you quoted me as i show below. that its about politics and costs and that it would affect the population.. which the electricity demand for the area is not high enough to sway the argument to change that... so why mention the danube.. it has nothing to do with bitcoin mining or hydropower to power bitcoin mining.
no one would be foolish to set up a mining farm in that area..

Yeah, the Danube is a crap example...let's talk about the Nile, ups.. no good Volga? Amazon? All the Siberian Rivers that flow in the artic? The Ganges? That too has only a 42 meters drop for 800 km.
Actually, it would be better to let you tell me what river (except the Anduin) isn't acting like that.

~

i am familiar..
im in the UK we have hundreds of canals and thousands of canal locks.. the stupid thing you dont see is you cant use a dam as a 'lock'
a dam is a dam and a lock is a lock. if your going to dam a river you dam a river. boats cant go up
so the only time you dam a river is if the demand for electric outweight the public need for an open river

No, Franky, the question was pretty simple.
Why would a single dam affect transportation on a river where you already have 100 locks...
Because that was one of your reasons why dams are not built by the evil gubbermint.

if your going to dam a river you dam a river. boats cant go up

  Are you forking serious?

nope. it does not play out as short term minded as you think
i know your thinking when the price jumped to $20k from novembers lower rate.. that the hashrate must have jumped 3-4fold
no
here ill show you.

There is no point in showing me something I DIDN'T think like that.
I already told you, spike doesn't happen like that because miners are not some stuff you can buy from Tesco!
Have you ever ordered one? Did you choose next day shipping? /sarcasm

Of course (1) ! it didn't jump because it takes a month at least to get that miner and in December even pre-orders for March were filled.

then knowing the btc PRICE is only a bit above that..  so in your mindset. miners in december should have been mining at 120terrahash. because PRICES were 3x so hashrate could/would/should have been 3X 'because they could afford to'
sorry but no. it dont work like that.

Of course (2) !! it doesn't work like that! And I'm not going to repeat myself, you have the answer for this also above.

you will see miners in the MAJORITY only increase 5-10% as a planned periodic growth. if bitcoin went to $1m a coin in under 2 years. you wont see mining pools jump to network hash of 6.6zetahash overnight (using the metrics of this generations ASICs)($900k)

Of course (3) !!! Because like I was saying (the third time already) there is no spare capacity. Just like in the oil and gas industry. Only a few countries can afford 10% increase even if they want to produce more, there are simply no drilled wells and it takes months to make them.
Just like chips are not printed at home and you need to wait for TMSC to produce another batch.

lol im laughing
you should be a comedian

Thank you, at least being a comedian might lead to a successful carrier, being stubborn is for sure not.

[AlexAtom]

Yes, i am agree that bitcoin mining won't causing damage on our environment. It would be different story if bitcoin mining produce some waste products.
Bitcoin mining only consuming power, i don't see any damage on environment because of this.

[deppil]

Bitcoin mining is consuming much electricity indeed, but it won't damage our environment as long the power resource for electricity is eco-friendly.
There are many industries that can causing more harm for environment than bitcoin. So i think crypto mining is not bad for environment

Thats the point that mining requires big electricity and long-term electricity use will certainly damage the environment?
especially if the tool you use is damaged? of course it will add damage to the environment right. but the effect will not be too large I think

[bitfocus]

Actually, almost everything we use/consume is killing the nature, but we can't stop using all the technologies and go back to the dark age, can we? Yes, Hydro Electricity is a solution, Wind Turbines and Solar can be other means, too.

[mimienamphine]

The high cost involved in mining bitcoin is really surprising to me. This will lead to the establishment of more planets.The activities of burning high volumes of fossil fuel to drive some of these plants lead to environmental pollution. Now too many pollutions have to lead to global warming and change in the weather pattern nowadays. These negative implications affect the rainfall pattern and crops plantations.

[drm]

Don't know what some people are worried about, the following industries have been allowed to ruin the world and environment in far worse ways for decades or even longer.

1   ULAB   
2   Mining and Ore Processing   
3   Lead Smelting   
4   Tanneries   
5   ASGM   
6   Industrial Dumpsites
7   Industrial Estates   
8   Chemical Manufacturing   
9   Product Manufacturing   
10   Dye Industry

[HenryHope123]

There will always be a negative natural effect in any lucrative future. The power consumed by bitcoin extraction is one of the effects. Therefore, one of the important things to consider in bitcoin mining is the energy generating system. Let's not forget that the financial industry, including the last segment of e-money, will also be using energy for example. Thus, some or most of the energy consumed by bitcoin extraction will not come as a surplus but as a shift. For instance, it would be interesting to see something that the security level for a transaction is proportional to its value.

[Rowena123]

Consumption is the reason why it is difficult to engage in bitcoin mining in most developing countries because their energy supply is ineffective and generates electricity at very high costs. For one, all that energy is turned into heat, so it can be used for heating (panting). Thus, some or most of the energy consumed by bitcoin extraction will not come as a surplus but as a shift. For instance, it would be interesting to see something that the security level for a transaction is proportional to its value. It only consumes energy.

[Dmitry.Vastov]

There is this widespread notion that Bitcoin mining is detrimental to the environment, because of all the electricity it consumes. At a quick superficial glance, it seems logical. But in reality, it is not exactly the case.

Who mines Bitcoin and what kind of electricity is used for Bitcoin mining?

Currently, China accounts for about 71% of the mining hash power in the world. The mining farms are based in Western China. But why there?

Hydro power plants have been created in the past for the production of aluminium. Electricity is 60% of the cost to aluminium production through smelting. The aluminium market is oversaturated for years now and China, being a top producer, has cut the production. So they have a huge surplus of hydro energy that is not utilized. For simplicity, imagine a hydro power plant in the fields, surrounded by nothing else. And hydro energy is clean energy. It doesn’t kill trees.

However, the technological infrastructure for transporting the energy to regions that actually need it, is lacking. This overcapacity of energy can’t just be sent to China’s bustling urban centers. Actually it can, but electricity will have to travel long distances, which equals huge losses. Therefore, it would be more economical for a power consumer to be closer to the source of the power. This is where the mining farms and their warehouses have been built. Right next to the close-to-useless hydro power plants. So the majority of miners are using failed energy projects and not investing in new ones.

In order to mine Bitcoin, all you need is mining hardware, internet connection and a simple software and now the unutilized energy is used towards creating a decentralized blockchain system. Unused clean hydro energy is entering the global economy. This is the real mining! At the core of it, we have a Chinese river allowing a rural farmer in Africa get paid for the cotton he produces through the Bitcoin network. The Chinese rivers help a Filipino immigrant in USA to send his payroll to his relatives in the Philippines for cents of a dollar, rather than for a 40% commission fee via Western Union.

But Bitmain and the other pools are making so much money out of it. Is it fair?

Well, gold diggers and oil rigs are also making tons of money. Is it fair? Traditionally, the resource mining business has always been one of the most lucrative. It is at the top of the supply chain. In order for us to go to a gas station and fuel our car tank, someone had to drill that oil first. Gas has value for us as end users. We travel faster than on horses. In order for the gas station to make profit on retail prices, they need to buy that gas from someone first and so on. There is value for everyone in the chain, provided that the product or resource is actually needed.

The value exchange is pretty simple

Unutilized clean energy coming from rivers that doesn’t pollute the air on one hand. And the maintaining of a global decentralized payment system on the other.

So the real question is: “Is a decentralized, open, alternative, state-free monetary system needed?” For the average citizen in a developed country, it may still not be. But for billions underbanked that is life-changing.

A system that allows for 24/7 payments with no borders and close to zero fees. An alternative system to fiat money, that allows people in countries like Venezuela to protect their money and assets in rough times. A system that provides banking for billions in regions where there is no banks.

Conclusion

Unutilized clean hydro energy is being transformed into a global, borderless, open, decentralized, alternative financial system. The air is not being polluted. But the annual profits of banks are! And they will keep pondering how detrimental Bitcoin mining for humanity is. Is this the truth? Decide for yourself.

I would be happy to hear your thoughts on the subject...

Whenever a new technology has introduced in the market, also it receives the two responses that is one group is in the favour of bitcoin and other in the against of it and the same is happening now the most of the population is in the favour of bitcoin and a small group of people are in against of bitcoin and this is the rumours spread by them that in coming decade bitcoin will use twice the amount of electricity as use by the entire world currently and I think this news is practically impossible.

[LaurenProfi]

On some side, Yes , because the extraction of Bitcoin , go resources, these resources we draw from mother earth ! But it is not so global as emissions from cars and etc, it is necessary to begin to change to mankind instead of development ! If every a will throw out garbage where it is necessary and not in the forest or river that is!

[franky1]

Of course (3) !!! Because like I was saying (the third time already) there is no spare capacity. Just like in the oil and gas industry. Only a few countries can afford 10% increase even if they want to produce more, there are simply no drilled wells and it takes months to make them.
Just like chips are not printed at home and you need to wait for TMSC to produce another batch.

water and oil are not the same. once you use oil its gone. when water goes through a turbine. water still exists. thus can be reused.
and if reservoir one has a capacity of 365 million litres. reservoir two doesnt need to be 365million litres.
infact it doesnt even need to be 1 million litres to catch a day of R1's daily run off to double a day.
all it needs is a small narrow run-through that water flows to create pressure (you know make the tip of a hosepipe smaller than its beginning so that the pressure rises.

as you say its more about price. and if you done some maths. china's production is multiple percent above demand. and that excess goes to waste unused, unpaid for. so power stations are loving that bitcoin farms are buying the excess.
the power stations make profit. and now make more. they could use it to create extra production. but demand is not there to push/sway them into using the many many many techniques to re-use water after its gone through a dam.
and yes there are many ways. that dont need to rely on depth/height/gravity

EG
lets say a steel turbine is heavy and needs Xpsi pressure to move it. to then spin a electro magnet of 100 coils.
your mindset thinks Y water is needed and Z height for gravity to produce Xpsi.

yet.. if you shrink the nosel of the water pipe. = less water needed to produce same pressure
yet.. if you use a lighter material for the turbine = less pressure needed = less watr needed
yet.. if you add more coils in the electro magnet = less water needed

EG make the turbine lighter and electromagnet bigger then water becomes less of the issue

[allanaire]

Depends on how you receive electricity, if through Hydroelectric power plants , using solar or wind batteries that drive, but if using heat power station, causing damage.

[NOTARIUS_BTC]

Absolutely no. Mining requires electricity, like many electrical appliances of our time. If there is harm, it is equal to the harm caused by electrical appliances in the house combined: refrigerator, microwave, TV, computer, etc.

[Emilyp]

Only when the involved parties utilise eco-friendly power generation can we truly say it doesn't contribute to environmental damage. Mining is notoriously known to consume a whole lot of energy compared to the appliances we use at home so they basically contribute in the generation of more electricity which is majorly from fossil fuels, a known contributor to global warming.

[still_looking]

I believe the thing that makes Bitcoin environment friendly is its limited use and interest compared to banks. But the interest in banks could go down when there will be more corrupt people. And any new market leader in crypto could devalue, because when it tries to be regulated, people might see the coin as corrupt. Then in some way nothing stops crypto from taking more energy.

I mean, other things in life that consume energy seem to have an upper limit in theory. I do not expect the world to produce less steel for the same amount of energy in future. You may want more steel, IT infrastructure and services or anything. But there is an end because you need at least space. I don't see an end like this for hashrate growth. There is a coin limit in the Bitcoin design, but why would anyone be stopped from making use of a new coin with the same characteristicts like Bitcoin in the mining phase. There will probably be some economic cycle and hashrate growth will go on.