Bitcoin & Electricity: Threat or Blessings

[franky1]

im laughing at the OP's stats
ireland uses 3.2gw a year!!?(seems low)

hmm
3.2million kw
imagine a pc, house lighting. fridges, washing machines.. screw it lets call it 6kwH a day minimal (£1 a day @16p/kwh)
(yea im using a yearly electric bill of £365 which seems low end for most people. but you will see why)

so low end 2190 kw a year per house
so ireland only has 1461 houses at low end or less houses if they used mor than £1 a day of electric..
(simple math anyone can do can see 3.2gw is not irelands entire yearly usage)
ireland uses 3.2gw AN HOUR!!

but lets go check how accurate even 3.2 is.. whether yearly or hourly
https://www.worlddata.info/europe/ireland/energy-consumption.php
"The most important measure in the energy balance of Ireland is the total consumption of 23.79 billion kWh of electric energy per year"
(23790gw a year, =65gwh per day,= 2.7gw per hour)
so its 2.7gw a hour....


now lets take bitcoin mining
~55exahash = 3928571 s9 asics (14terra hash. 1.3kwh)
3928571 asics=5107142kw per hour (5.1gw an hour)

yes bitcoin uses more gwh than ireland by a factor of nearly 2x
but a 2 seater car uses more fuel than a 2 seater motorbike by a factor of 3x
(omg shock horror destroy all cars!!!!(sarcasm))

an entire global currency uses more electric than a small island..... thats called twisting facts(comparing an international currency to an island of sheep, fields and.. Guinness)
now lets not twist things to create a propaganda shock drama
compare how much CHINA uses.. seeing as most of the mining propaganda is about "china own bitcoin".

https://www.worlddata.info/asia/china/energy-consumption.php
"The most important measure in the energy balance of China is the total consumption of
5,920.00 billion kWh of electric energy per year."

yep china uses 675gw per hour
but now compare that to the bitcoin mining of 5gw per hour

wait. the china own 51% of mining.. so using the propaganda against the propagandists..
2.4gw per hour mining vs 675gw general usage


.. but hell lets be extreme lets say all bitcoin mining was in china and go back to the 5gw per hour mining
5gw/h mining vs 675gw/h general usage (just for china... not whole world)
yea extreme numbers.. still amounts to bitcoin mining using LESS than 1% of just china

[1715135841]

1715135841

[1715135841]

1715135841

[1715135841]

1715135841

[1715135841]

1715135841

[hachiman13]

There is an increase in green energy miners who will help to change the way miners consume energy. Most use solar energy but newer projects are looking at bigger alternatives like geothermal

We can also look at a different angle, not just a solution on the side where we optimize the source of energy. We can improve the efficiency of processors so it would take less energy to solve more complicated mathematical puzzles. It might be harder to achieve, but I think this solution for long term.

[franky1]

There is an increase in green energy miners who will help to change the way miners consume energy. Most use solar energy but newer projects are looking at bigger alternatives like geothermal

We can also look at a different angle, not just a solution on the side where we optimize the source of energy. We can improve the efficiency of processors so it would take less energy to solve more complicated mathematical puzzles. It might be harder to achieve, but I think this solution for long term.

processing efficiency is already happening.. its called asics
imagine doing 55exahash using CPU

(intel  i5/amd phenom ii)

1cpu =14mhash
1000=14ghash
1m cpu = 14thash

yep 1 ASIC is 1million PC's
so the 4million asics = 4 TRILLION PC's

try to imagine bitcoin if we remained CPU mining. requiring 4 trillion PC's

[Zin-Zang]

try to imagine bitcoin if we remained CPU mining. requiring 4 trillion PC's

Actually the point to this topic is try to imagine,
if Bitcoin was not an energy hog sucking up excess electricity and causing the price of electricity to increase for general consumers
that have nothing at all to do with the crypto.

IE:
An Energy Efficient Proof of Stake uses less electricity per household than an XBOX and would have ~zero affect on the energy infrastructure.

While Bitcoin Wastes so much electricity that it increase environmental pollution , while raising energy prices ,
while straining local electricity grids, and requiring more natural resources to be drained for it's Limited Transaction Capacity.

Which is why by 2021 either bitcoin is dead or only mined by Government Sanctioned Miners.
Remember Bitcoin Miners have to receive Electric Utility Approval to draw that extreme amount of energy,
therefore at some point , Utility Approval can be used to control or destroy them.

While Proof of Stake can be run on a Laptop in a Coffee Shop , with no one the wiser that you are even doing it.  

The comparison is really just Amazing beyond words.

FYI:
Just to show Bitcoin Energy Waste is Growing Faster than Calculated.
This Article Stated Bitcoin would be using 0.5% of the world energy by the end of 2018.
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/bitcoin-mining-energy-use-electricity-cryptocurrency-a8353981.html

But this Article points out that Bitcoin has already exceeded that 0.5% and already at 1% of the world's energy and we are not even out of 2018 Yet. 
https://theoutline.com/post/6047/bitcoin-mining-accounts-for-almost-one-percent-of-the-worlds-energy-consumption?zd=1&zi=7ed2ljca

[larrylegend33]

I think that can only mean "One great solution for the world with one gib problem".. The elecetricity usage went so high with the bitcoin and the all other altcoin mining in all around the world. The number are terrifiying.. The cryptocurrency brings great things to our lifes yes but that much of usage can harm everything in the world.. I can't say threat or blessing but this could be something very important in near future for the world..

[jice]

you are asking the wrong question; You should ask yourself if a technology that consumes energy necessarily have a high carbon footprint? Of course it's not.

For those interested, I share with you a 35-page personal study on Bitcoin's energy footprint;

Difficult since the beginning of the year not to fall on a newspaper article announcing that the Bitcoin network is an ecological disaster due to its high energy consumption. We will soon learn that Bitcoin miners are responsible for the non respect of the Kyoto protocol.

The Bitcoin network uses a large amount of energy. However how I said earlier, does a technology that consumes energy necessarily have a high carbon footprint?

After analyzing the mining sector and the energy sector, this argument does not hold if we take into account the rapid adoption of renewable energies by miners. Better yet, Bitcoin contributes to the development of alternative energy solutions, particularly hydroelectricity

Medium:
https://medium.com/@jicprusnel/bitcoin-as-an-environmental-subsidy-to-alternative-energy-1e91c427ab9e

PPt presentation:
https://www.slideshare.net/JeanChristopheBusnel/bitcoin-and-its-energy-footprint-120144132?qid=f0356e77-e70d-4053-95d9-39d6e7065cc7&v=&b=&from_search=1

[Zin-Zang]

you are asking the wrong question; You should ask yourself if a technology that consumes energy necessarily have a high carbon footprint? Of course it's not.

Your Conclusion is wrong.

The World makes a Limited Supply of Energy , Bitcoin requires an ever growing amount of the limited supply.
Just because they monopolize hydro in one area , does not mean a Coal / Nuclear plant does not need to make up the difference on a electric grid to keep it from collapsing under the strain.  * Many Nuclear Plants also run Giant Diesel Generators when they need to decrease the output from the reactor.*
The World has still not found a way to dispose of nuclear waste safely without it taking 100s of years.

Limited Supply means when one source draws excessive amounts, it raises the price for everyone else.
Simple Economics.
Plus Saying the renewals can handle the load is pure nonsense, bitcoin rate of consumption is exceeding renewals growth by multiple amounts.

  

[nur rochid]

can both. become a threat because it requires a lot of electrical energy, can be imagined later when more and more bitcoiner. can be a blessing, because the state electricity company is selling well so that it gets big sales

[franky1]

zinzang

do the math research, not the media research
i really have to laugh at the independant newspaper article... how empty of real content
'he said x by 2018'
'he said y by 2020'
final quote
“But the future estimate? That’s quite debatable,” he said.
it made me laugh


bitcoin mining is not eating past the excess as shown before from actual math. bitcoin is not even 1% of china...
china actually produce 13% excess than demand. so its no where near eating into demand.

buying excess does NOT raise prices of the consumer demand. infact it helps lower prices.
imagine you produce 2000 bananas a day. it costs you $1k to grow that allotment.
but you only sell 1800 ono average. meaning you have to sell each banana for over 55cents
now you know 200 banana are going to waste unpaid for.
but tomorrow a vegetarian group that eats alot of banana wants to buy up your 100 of your excess
yay you are now selling 1900 bananas a day meaning you can sell your bananas at 53cents


as for the production. the asic farms are actually investing in their own power plants too thus wont even touch national/public demand in the future

oh and as for PoS. dont let me bring out the comedy moments of that.
currently because blocks on crap coins are not worth much, people dont care to bother untangling a crapcoin blockchain of PoS
but should something such as bitcoin move to PoS. you will see many people untangle and recombine new higher blockheight of bitcoin data and gain from it.
PoS is not safe, its just evaded attack by how little value can be gained by messing with it because crap coins are crap.

oh as for electric
did you know that cutting down trees to make wood for floorboards. so that wooden desks can sit on the floorboards so that paper can sit on the desks actually causes more environmental damage than a electronic tablet would which can store more pages than the desk and floorboards can

think about it.

[ClintonJ]

did you know that cutting down trees to make wood for floorboards. so that wooden desks can sit on the floorboards so that paper can sit on the desks actually causes more environmental damage than a electronic tablet would which can store more pages than the desk and floorboards can

think about it.

Sir , So lame statement , You mean to say Cutting Down trees causes more harm than Bitcoin Mining. Lets clarify again we are not here to bargain which causes less damages or which causes more damages.  In both sense it will harm as well as damage our environment in long term.

We should think it for sustainable growth , who said to forget Bitcoin and trash it. Technology is developing day by day. Nothing is impossible. You are thinking about your lifeterm , 60 - 90 years may be. But here we have to think sustainable growth for next generations.

Don't just fight until winning with your lame argument. Today or tomorrow we have to think this idea.

[Valer4ik]

Of course, no one can guarantee this, especially I) But see for yourself, the hashrate is growing steadily, the development is continuing steadily, in spite of the correction, maybe not as fast as we would like, but still. They want to do the same futures and ETFs not at some EOS, but only on Bitcoin (I mean not just paper speculation, but with real buying and selling). When the lightning network will be massively used, it will be possible to quickly and cheaply pay for inexpensive goods and services with Bitcoin. With the further development of Bitcoin, the increasing adaptation of SegWit and the unloading of the network from small and frequent transactions (thanks to non-log linening), the speed of transactions will increase many times and commissions will decrease. Of course, surely some Altcoins will occupy their niche, maybe they can earn a lot more money, but this does not mean that Bitcoin will definitely die out in a vacuum.

[jice]

you are asking the wrong question; You should ask yourself if a technology that consumes energy necessarily have a high carbon footprint? Of course it's not.

Your Conclusion is wrong.

The World makes a Limited Supply of Energy , Bitcoin requires an ever growing amount of the limited supply.
Just because they monopolize hydro in one area , does not mean a Coal / Nuclear plant does not need to make up the difference on a electric grid to keep it from collapsing under the strain.  * Many Nuclear Plants also run Giant Diesel Generators when they need to decrease the output from the reactor.*
The World has still not found a way to dispose of nuclear waste safely without it taking 100s of years.

Limited Supply means when one source draws excessive amounts, it raises the price for everyone else.
Simple Economics.
Plus Saying the renewals can handle the load is pure nonsense, bitcoin rate of consumption is exceeding renewals growth by multiple amounts.

  

You didn't read the study. You answer make no sens because Nuclear isn't cost competitive with coal or hydropower. But if you wanna talk about it here or on private, please be free.

Furthermore, the Bitcoin ledger can only be immutable if and only if it is costly to produce. The fact that Proof-of-Work (PoW) is “costly” is a feature, not a bug. Bitcoin’s public ledger is secured by its collective hashing power. But Bitcoin doesn't need more energy for being censorship resistant. Bitcoin network is already censorship resistant, if the hash rate increase it's only because of the mining industry whose strictly profite motivated But thinking that this increase will be constant is wrong because every four years the reward decreases.

[CryptoGosu]

If Bitcoin continues rapidly, then perhaps in the future it will be the cause of the development of the energy industry. Bitcoin is really a major change in the life of mankind.

[Zin-Zang]

oh and as for PoS. dont let me bring out the comedy moments of that.
currently because blocks on crap coins are not worth much, people dont care to bother untangling a crapcoin blockchain of PoS
but should something such as bitcoin move to PoS. you will see many people untangle and recombine new higher blockheight of bitcoin data and gain from it.
PoS is not safe, its just evaded attack by how little value can be gained by messing with it because crap coins are crap.

oh as for electric
did you know that cutting down trees to make wood for floorboards. so that wooden desks can sit on the floorboards so that paper can sit on the desks actually causes more environmental damage than a electronic tablet would which can store more pages than the desk and floorboards can

think about it.

Sorry , there is no way you are going to convince me that Bitcoin Energy Waste is in any way acceptable.

The Crap coin argument about Proof of Stake falls on deaf ears with me,
Many Proof of Stake coins are worth millions so saying they evaded attack because there is no profit in attacking them is false logic.

By 2021 , I believe there will be no denying the issue, so I have no problem letting time be the final arbiter of our discussion.

Later,
ZZ

[Wind_FURY]

Plus electricity cannot be stored.

FYI:
Electricity can be stored,

1. Batteries
2. Flywheels
3. Gravitational potential energy using a pumped hydroelectric facility.
4. Compressed Air Energy Storage
5. Rail Energy Storage
6. Molten Salt Storage
7. Thermal Energy Storage

Reference: http://discovermagazine.com/2015/july-aug/26-power-stash

 

Storing mega mega mega watts of electricity? Are the efficient batteries? Efficient energy storage is one of the world's biggest problems. Why is that electricity must be used right away the moment when it is generated?

If all the electricity supply generated can be stored then it would change that market altogether.

[ClintonJ]

Plus electricity cannot be stored.

FYI:
Electricity can be stored,

1. Batteries
2. Flywheels
3. Gravitational potential energy using a pumped hydroelectric facility.
4. Compressed Air Energy Storage
5. Rail Energy Storage
6. Molten Salt Storage
7. Thermal Energy Storage

Reference: http://discovermagazine.com/2015/july-aug/26-power-stash

 

Hmm right but if we use PoS,  and miners are out of network, will it hamper the process

[Zin-Zang]

Hmm right but if we use PoS,  and miners are out of network, will it hamper the process

Proof of Stake transactions speed can exceed bitcoin current PoW transaction speed ,
but it would hamper the miners ability of profiting by controlling bitcoin,
which is why the miners will never agree to switching consensus methods.

[Matt Hardy]

Fundstrat’s Sam Doctor tweeted the below image demonstrating the past performance of Bitcoin as it relates to the P/BE indicator.
https://cryptoiscoming.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/fundstrat-pbe.png

Doctor said:
    “We believe breakeven mining costs provide a support level for $BTC, as #miners – main natural #Crypto sellers – reduce selling at low $BTCUSD price. Based on expected computing hashpower and breakeven cost growth, that could imply #Bitcoin price of $36,000 by 2019 year end.”

Bitcoin mining wasn't generally this costly – it's a focused industry which has advanced from fans mining in their storm cellar on an old CPU to immense stockrooms loaded up with a great many dollars of specific ASIC miners or specially designed mining rigs with illustrations cards. The furor has come to the heart of the matter where gamers have seen illustrations card costs ascend out of their achieve, prompting a large number of them to detest the crypto development by and large.

As mining setups turn out to be further developed and rivalry increments alongside the trouble of the calculations, the value ascends ever higher. It's assessed that before the year's over, Bitcoin mining will devour 0.5% of the world's electricity.Ethereum miners haven't fared much better – in the wake of seeing a 20x increment in esteem, individuals ran to mining the number 2 cryptocurrency, yet falling costs and expanded rivalry have lessened rewards there also. Tom's Hardware discharged a diagram demonstrating the decrease in mining productivity from December to March when costs tumbled from $871 to under $500 where they remain today, bringing about a 10x decrease in mining gainfulness.

[jojohamasa]

Some ICO field of operation is alternative energy
Such as WPP energy as well as the project I have its signature
In other words, crypto contributes to
the diffusion of alternative energy on a large scale.

[oseikuf44]

I have researching Blockchain technology since 2 years. So i have decided to conclude about some topics which are controversial. Please correct me if you got me wrong.

Bitcoin has become the most talked thing recently for its upsurge and downfall, the very feature that makes it unique to all others. Bitcoin can be collected through a process of solving mathematical equation, better known as mining. Mining needs a great set of computer components to do it pretty well but if takes a huge amount of energy to produce a tiny amount of bitcoin. Since mining become very popular among enthusiast and the price hike is going up; more and more people are involving themselves into this.

The Irony Fact

The irony of the fact is that, it also takes away a lot of energy that can be used in our daily lives for days and months. Most of the countries produce their electricity through fossil fuel or by burning coal or gas, which is emptying day by day.  It puts a great deal of pressure in our future endeavors as nothing is made to replace it.

The Usage of Electricity increases by 300 times
Bitcoin surely is new revolution for the blockchain technology but it has a big price to pay even to make 1 bitcoin. The less economically powerful countries mostly produce their electricity through their natural resources and does not have power plants that produces from molecular level. Recent reviews shows that, since the arrival of mining, the use of electricity increases by 300 times comparing to the previous years.

Typically the Bitcoin network currently consumes about 2. 55 gigawatts (GW) of electricity for each year; to put that into perspective, the complete country of Ireland has an average electricity utilization of 3.2 GW, and Austria has an average electricity usage of 8. 2 GW per year. Over the past year, the estimated amount of TwH that the Bitcoin network utilizes per year increased 413. 37 percent. In comparison with countries like the Czech Republic, the Bitcoin network makes use of 102. 3 % of the complete electricity consumed by the country per year.

At first, the condition was easy enough to become solved by the standard CPU, but since more miners joined typically the network and the condition started to be more difficult, miners identified that GPU were far better suited to solve the particular problem. Just a couple years afterwards, FPGAs and after that ASICs – application specific integrated brake lines – were better suited than GPUs to solve a block. Folks, like magnate and former Google information security Professional, Marc Bevand, feels that the quantity of energy that mining uses will cause further development by way of renewable energies. Bevand believes that the energy consumption will eventually guide to decreased costs of renewable energy for modern society at large.

Electric bills have already put miners looking for a less costly source of energy. Companies have been looking to be able to places like Canada plus the Sichuan province wherever electricity is typically less costly. Because miners have incentives to use cheap electrical energy, this results in more R&D in the energy space. In the long run, this will make forms of electricity less costly to all of modern society as innovations are manufactured in energy.
Also even though amount of energy mining procedures consume does not really go unnoticed, some individuals think that the benefits associated with exploration - network security ~ outweigh the negative externalities like electricity consumption.

The particular Bitcoin network is secured by a consensus protocol called proof-of-work (PoW). Miners are paid minted Bitcoin and transaction costs for solving an obstruction newly, securing the network at the same period. If a miner is definitely not really capable to resolve the cryptographic evidence, obstructs of transaction history shall not be added to the blockchain and blockchain technology generally would be nullified; simply no record of offer background would become produced if obstructions had been not really resolved and added to the string by miners. The price that should end up being paid for this community protection is normally the large quantities of energy that a POW.  

Cypherpunk Jameson Lopp accepted tweets to express how he feels about Bitcoin’s energy expenses issue. Lopp is convinced that the energy expenditure that Bitcoin query accrues is usually merely taxes that must become paid for network protection.

Economic researcher Vasily Sumanov also believes that energy inefficiency and waste materials is normally currently the price we pay to conduct blockchain experiments:

“Higher energy consumption is associated not only with environmental pollution but also with the higher security of a distributed ledger dedicated to storage and transfer of value. I have a strong feeling that this is a temporary situation, and in the future, Bitcoin energy efficiency as a function of transaction volume and energy consumption will increase as a result of Lightning Network adoption.”

Unsurprisingly, the computer hardware industry has responded to the demand for ever faster processing. Gone are the days when anyone could mine Bitcoin on an ordinary laptop. These days, you need a specialist mining rig with a dedicated processor known as an Application-Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC). These things don’t come cheap.

Big Pools Big Power
As with all hardware-intensive enterprises, those with the most bucks inevitably have the advantage. So miners have grouped together into “pools”, sharing resources and benefiting from economies of scale, which helps them to gain market share. Bitcoin mining is now dominated by three big pools, which together account for 55% of total hashpower. About 80% Bitcoin mining is presently done in China(I think it is reducing day by day specially in china as there government imposed the rules). But it is definitely developing in additional locations as well: Iceland, Asia, Georgia, the Czech Republic, India, parts of the United Expresses, Venezuela. With inexpensive and abundant energy anywhere, in reality. This is usually because, despite the equipment “hands competition,” by the biggest price for Bitcoin miners is normally power considerably.

Power era on the range needed for Bitcoin exploration requires property. A lot of it. Fossil fuel mines, hydro plant life, solar energy and blowing wind farms - all of them want property. And there is usually no place on this globe where usage of property is normally not really managed by federal government, one method or another. Will government authorities end up being prepared to dedicate bigger tracts of property to power era for cryptocurrency miners ever? It appears less likely. Nevertheless you appear at it, as Bitcoin’s energy demand boosts, inexpensive abundant electricity items for Bitcoin miners shall decrease.

Predictably, Bitcoin miners downplay both their energy use and the threat it poses to ordinary people, ordinary businesses and the planet that they occupy. They state that sites like the Bitcoin Energy Intake Index overstate power use, that Bitcoin exploration is certainly no even more costly than typical fund, that exploration is certainly just using excess electric power that is normally not really required by various other users, and that anyway exploration is a beneficial activity that provides wealth to the accepted areas that sponsor it. Unfortunately there is usually little proof to support their promises, and in parts of the U.S. it is normally very clear that the third state - that exploration just uses excess energy - is normally in fact untrue. But also if Bitcoin miners’ promises were true, Bitcoin would end up being completely reliant about federal government for its power source still, one method or another. It is usually anything but immune from federal government power, as its supporter’s state.  

Bitcoin’s want for power is normally its Achilles heel

Great things come with great prices, so does Bitcoin. It actually has a bigger threat for the future as our stats are showing. Rather than relying on the public power source, miners can made their own power source and start mining the reaming bitcoins, till then use the existing one as the exchange device and earn from it. People do not need to get disheartened as green energy and other potable energy sources are on the verge of creating market hype soon. Patience is the key here.

Still We need to think Green , Yes Green with Bitcoin. Its Possible.

Don't take it negatively , i am writing article in this forum for long time still no intention to participate in any bounty campaign. Last month i felt i need for livelihood , But for the last update i just need 1 merit. Yes i am begging. Because i know i am capable enough for it. Just need the help of the community.
 

It is a great blessing for our generation to come up with the ideas of using eletricity to create a financial system. If electricity is used in production of harmful explosive devices, why can't it be use to generate bitcoins which benefit us positively.