Spot on. As adoption happens, Bitcoin will evolve to mean so many different things to so many different people. Which is a good thing.

In the end, if Bitcoin wins, humanity wins. Because unlike fiat, nobody and no organization can claim ownership of the network.

Apart from their AI image generator (it isn't great), they allow me the freedom to break new ground in the Bitcoin space. Something other BTC platforms cannot.

Cool. This is how I'm hacking dystopia --> https://hackernoon.com/a-tale-of-ice-and-fire

Nice. Let me whip up something...

Sorry I've taken a while to respond to this.

You have given points to the effect of "renewable are not being allowed to compete with fossils" and to the extent that this is true, that shows the corrupting effect of fiat. And the unnecessary politicization of energy supply and demand economics. Only thing governments had to do in 2009, or 2010, even 2023, is mine and learn about BTC like their citizens. And ask for it in taxes. And all would be well with the world. It will happen eventually. Thank goodness for the fact that BTC is an idea whose time has come.

It might be true that renewable are becoming cheaper in many parts of the world for household needs. But most households, industry and social services can't get past the infrastructure costs like mega battery packs and decentralized grids for energy synchronization.

Now, allow me share on how I think it will happen. Some research has show that BTC can help supercharge the energy transition --> https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/bitcoin-mining-solar-wind-renewable-energy-b2454666.html My own back of the napkin calculations involving the power consumption of the hash rate, the mining rewards and the value growth of the currency (which tracks everything like transactions within it) confirms it.

The facts are startling.

People are willing to pay or invest about 6x more money in their electiricty bill if it is running Bitcoin or some Bitcoin related productivity, than if it was running Netflix, Cable TV, Refrigerators in a Supermarket, Video games, etc. Name it.

Because that is what the growth in value means. People are pumping funds into Bitcoin.

This is wild and means the best way to really transition is to build as many BTC projects around the world, run them on renewables and wherever possible, and subsidize the whole thing with fossils as renewable tech matures.

Again, it will happen. Because it is an idea whose time has come.

Sam Altman wants $7 trillion to build AI systems but Bitcoin-for-renewables is serious competition he isn't thinking about. Again, people are willing to pay for electiricty mining/transacting BTC than for electricty generating impressive ChatGPT prompts.

I'm hoping to systemize all this in an article on Hackernoon.com. Stay tuned.

Thanks

Thanks

Thank you

Thanks

Thanks

Thank you

Sent you some sats 👌. If you're up for it, we could continue this journey.

Thanks @elysia. Great answer.

You could fund Bitcoin startups doing something revolutionary.

Now about fiat being connected to fossil fuels via the petrodollar, this is a non sequitur if one concludes that 'therefore if we do away with fossil fuels, we shall have done away with fiat'. fiat corrupts fossil fuels, not the other way around. And they do not corrupt the world together.

Fossil fuels are only a big problem as far as only one metric is concerned - they pollute the air. Otherwise, they are the densest, cheapest, most useful energy source that propelled the USA into global dominance (because most thankfully to their lucky stars who watch over ya'll, when Americans first discovered oil they could trade it as they see fit. They literally showered in it and at one point, owners of oil wells thought oil was some useless nuisance making their farmlands dirty. Not like every other part of the world now where oil trade is a secret dealing between top brass in the government and foreign contractors).

Because of fossil fuels, in fact, we can support 8 billion humans on this planet with the best modern life has to offer. And China can manufacture tons of solar panels faster than a kid sucks breastmilk from its mother's tits.

Bitcoiners will therefore go where energy is the cheapest and if Texas has state subsidies making solar the cheapest, then by all means, be my guest. But don't go badmouthing people in Africa say running Bitcoin nodes with cow dung biogas, tree wood, diesel, or plastics. Because this ain't Texas.

@mallardshead I would like to respectfully disagree with your assessment that by 2035 PV owners will be generating 150% of their energy needs. This really is simple Physics and truthful market dynamics. I live in Uganda and full-scale rooftop solar energy is something acquired only by the rich who can afford to pay for 24/7 national electricity. The poor can only afford tiny PV systems for lighting. These do not boil water and certainly cannot cook food.

OP has written a very good and fun-to-read article on HVDC, but the way he fumbled the data on solar electricity supply economics is off-putting. Simply understand this, if solar WAS REALLY cheaper that fossil fuels, then the poorest parts of the world would be the most PV covered areas on Earth. Places like Morocco that literally enjoy desert level amounts of sunshine almost 12 hours each day, might afford to greatly subsidize solar PV farms enough to profit from that entire investment. In Uganda, with our equatorial climate, lots of water bodies and forested places, it hardly ever shines non-stop for 8 hours on the sunniest of days during the dry season. So PV farms here will always run secondary (big time secondary) to national grid hydroelectricity.

If neither you nor the OP hasn't heard of Alex Epstein I really recommend you go check him out. He has facts backed by graphs, references, and rebuttals to quoted exaggerations by all the big pro-renewable experts (including Leonardo Di Caprio's guy).

Thank you for your time.