$522k in a day

[mvalley]

So I was running a few numbers and based on the current hash of 108,818,147 GH/s, the world is paying around 522k a day just for electricity (assuming 10c/kw, 2W/GH)

Everyday there is $2.1M USD mined.

Based on this and the assuming a 14% increase in difficulty per period, in 10 periods or about 120 days, the vast majority of miners will not be profitable anymore.

That's probably around when I'll be dumping my miners on ebay, lol.

[1714146078]

1714146078

[1714146078]

1714146078

[1714146078]

1714146078

[KimNam]

either bitcoin price increase or low difficulty increase will help miners to get profit in future
that's why i see many mining hardware on sale in ebay/another market
mining is not profitable anymore, especially for mining at home

[DrG]

The eletricity rates are really not the main consideration in determining whether or not you can profit from mining.  The cost of the ASIC hardware is the major hurdle, and as we continue to see decreasing cost per GH/s the difficulty will just keep going up.

Right now in just one months time you can go from being worthwhile to mine to a simple loss since 1 month is about 3 difficulty bumps.

[MelodyRowell]

So I was running a few numbers and based on the current hash of 108,818,147 GH/s, the world is paying around 522k a day just for electricity (assuming 10c/kw, 2W/GH)

Everyday there is $2.1M USD mined.

Based on this and the assuming a 14% increase in difficulty per period, in 10 periods or about 120 days, the vast majority of miners will not be profitable anymore.

That's probably around when I'll be dumping my miners on ebay, lol.

The newest ASIC only uses 0.7W/GH. So there is still plenty of room

[Justin00]

how much would it cost to buy that much mining power ?
just out of curiosity...

[sgk]

With that much of electricity being used for Bitcoin mining, I really wish mining analyzed some useful data, like protein folding or SETI data.

[mvalley]

how much would it cost to buy that much mining power ?
just out of curiosity...

At today's current shipping prices of around $2 per GH purchase, the world has at least $213,773,090 USD invested in mining equipment. But that's the latest and greatest. The reality is most people are running older equipment so I'd put the total investment more at $400M-$800M which is actually great for bitcoin since people have a huge vested interest in seeing it survive.

[mvalley]

With that much of electricity being used for Bitcoin mining, I really wish mining analyzed some useful data, like protein folding or SETI data.

Agreed. I feel that is the next evolution for POW where miners will run a calculation that will benefit humanity in some way.

[Harley997]

Your calculations do not take into consideration the fact that devs are making machines that are more efficient.

It also fails to account for the fact that everyone does not pay the same amount for electricity. When enough miners start to take their miners offline the difficulty will start to fall, making it more profitable for others to mine, giving them an incentive to buy additional miners

[sgk]

Your calculations do not take into consideration the fact that devs are making machines that are more efficient.

It also fails to account for the fact that everyone does not pay the same amount for electricity. When enough miners start to take their miners offline the difficulty will start to fall, making it more profitable for others to mine, giving them an incentive to buy additional miners

Still, even taking into consideration all those variables, IT IS CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF ENERGY spent on a calculation of no real value.

How about spending even a fraction of ANY electricity on ANYTHING that serves a real benefit in addition to managing the blockchain?

[jonsi]

Your calculations do not take into consideration the fact that devs are making machines that are more efficient.

It also fails to account for the fact that everyone does not pay the same amount for electricity. When enough miners start to take their miners offline the difficulty will start to fall, making it more profitable for others to mine, giving them an incentive to buy additional miners

Still, even taking into consideration all those variables, IT IS CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF ENERGY spent on a calculation of no real value.

How about spending even a fraction of ANY electricity on ANYTHING that serves a real benefit in addition to managing the blockchain?

No real value you say? How can you bee so ignorant? How much money do you think banks are spending in a day (on rent, electricity, security, etc etc etc etc) so they can operate and steal our money?

[sgk]

Your calculations do not take into consideration the fact that devs are making machines that are more efficient.

It also fails to account for the fact that everyone does not pay the same amount for electricity. When enough miners start to take their miners offline the difficulty will start to fall, making it more profitable for others to mine, giving them an incentive to buy additional miners

Still, even taking into consideration all those variables, IT IS CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF ENERGY spent on a calculation of no real value.

How about spending even a fraction of ANY electricity on ANYTHING that serves a real benefit in addition to managing the blockchain?

No real value you say? How can you bee so ignorant? How much money do you think banks are spending in a day (on rent, electricity, security, etc etc etc etc) so they can operate and steal our money?

Not so fast.

We're spending electricity on SOME kind of calculation anyways. What's wrong with doing it for something that secures blockchain as well as producing some data ALONGSIDE that is helpful to humanity in some other way too?

Wouldn't it be a win-win?

We're surely not comparing Bitcoin with banks in terms of operating, do we? Otherwise the whole idea of revolutionary currency just dies there itself.

[jonsi]

If you put it this way, I supose it could be done (I think PrimeCoin is something similar to this, but I could be wrong). The part with "no real benefit" made you look like an ignorantt, but again, I may be pulling it from the context.

[sgk]

If you put it this way, I supose it could be done (I think PrimeCoin is something similar to this, but I could be wrong). The part with "no real benefit" made you look like an ignorantt, but again, I may be pulling it from the context.

Yep, we got off the wrong foot, but I'm happy we're getting somewhere.

I'm not too sure about PrimeCoin, but I believe DataCoin (http://datacoin.info/) stores valuable data in the blockchain alongside transactions.

[nwfella]

Doing my best to screw the calculations of OP by still running my wholly inefficient BFL gear (65-nm).

What, 40watt's for 7.5/8GH, yeah baby! :p

[FeodoroAndy]

it is better to calculate how much watts is pulling all that hardware, although you cant calculate anything near to reality.

[nwfella]

So I was running a few numbers and based on the current hash of 108,818,147 GH/s, the world is paying around 522k a day just for electricity (assuming 10c/kw, 2W/GH)

Everyday there is $2.1M USD mined.

Based on this and the assuming a 14% increase in difficulty per period, in 10 periods or about 120 days, the vast majority of miners will not be profitable anymore.

That's probably around when I'll be dumping my miners on ebay, lol.

The newest ASIC only uses 0.7W/GH. So there is still plenty of room

Yup...this trend is definitely going to be continuing for at least another 6-9 months I'm thinking.

[Harley997]

Your calculations do not take into consideration the fact that devs are making machines that are more efficient.

It also fails to account for the fact that everyone does not pay the same amount for electricity. When enough miners start to take their miners offline the difficulty will start to fall, making it more profitable for others to mine, giving them an incentive to buy additional miners

Still, even taking into consideration all those variables, IT IS CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF ENERGY spent on a calculation of no real value.

How about spending even a fraction of ANY electricity on ANYTHING that serves a real benefit in addition to managing the blockchain?

you are assuming that "managing" (securing would be a more accurate word) the blockchain does not have any value. The blockchain provides a way for a person to securely send BTC (funds) to someone else without having to trust a 3rd party intermediary

[sgk]

Your calculations do not take into consideration the fact that devs are making machines that are more efficient.

It also fails to account for the fact that everyone does not pay the same amount for electricity. When enough miners start to take their miners offline the difficulty will start to fall, making it more profitable for others to mine, giving them an incentive to buy additional miners

Still, even taking into consideration all those variables, IT IS CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF ENERGY spent on a calculation of no real value.

How about spending even a fraction of ANY electricity on ANYTHING that serves a real benefit in addition to managing the blockchain?

you are assuming that "managing" (securing would be a more accurate word) the blockchain does not have any value. The blockchain provides a way for a person to securely send BTC (funds) to someone else without having to trust a 3rd party intermediary

No, I'm not assuming anything like that. If you read my next post, you'll see that I've discussed it further.

Quoting it below:

What's wrong with doing it for something that secures blockchain as well as producing some data ALONGSIDE that is helpful to humanity in some other way too?

Wouldn't it be a win-win?