pull down to refresh
136 sats \ 2 replies \ @shibe 26 Mar 2023 \ on: Skull of Satoshi bitcoin
Pretty cool that he's keeping an open mind.
IMO the way people view Bitcoin's usage is just kind of wrong, like saying it uses the equivalent of some country. If Bitcoin didn't exist, all the power it uses wouldn't magically be redirected elsewhere. A lot of it seems to be done with excess power and also in remote grids where there might not even be any place to send the electricity to.
Mining can be an excellent way to subsidize nuclear and other energy sources because you can use it for demand response (see Texas's program for this), essentially Bitcoin miners can sign up to receive electricity at cheaper rates as long as they ramp down operations during excess demand. Thus they're essentially subsidizing the construction of more power generation capacity.
The data shows just how overblown the MSM hysteria over Bitcoin mining really is too:
Is Bitcoin mining an environmental disaster?This question has undoubtedly sparked a lot of heated debate since Bitcoin has come under public scrutiny for its enormous energy consumption on par with that of whole nations. The energy mix plays a vital role in finding a conclusive answer to this question. Until additional and better data on the network’s power mix become available, strong assertions on either side of the debate should be considered with caution.A radical thought experiment can provide an alternative perspective on this question. What would be Bitcoin’s environmental footprint assuming the absolute worst case? For this experiment, let’s use the annualised power consumption estimate from CBECI as of July 13th, 2021, which corresponds to roughly 70 TWh. Let’s also assume that all this energy comes exclusively from coal (the most-polluting fossil fuel) and is generated in one of the world’s least efficient coal-fired power plants (the now-decommissioned Hazelwood Power Station in Victoria, Australia). In this worst-case scenario, the Bitcoin network would be responsible for about 111 Mt (million metric tons) of carbon dioxide emissions, accounting for roughly 0.35% of the world's total yearly emissions.
Source: University of Cambridge
TL;DR: Even if you assume the absolute worst case scenario where all Bitcoin mining was powered by the most polluting sources of electricity from power stations that have been decommissioned, mining Bitcoin would still contribute a mere 0.35% of global pollution.
And this is without taking into account how much the fiat banking system uses in comparison, or the fact that the value of the USD relies heavily on it remaining the global reserve currency, which in turn relies on US foreign policy, and the US military industrial complex is the most polluting industry on the planet.
reply
more energy = more humanity
The earth went WITHOUT ICE CAPS for millions of years. We are actually living in a colder period of earth’s life, it would be natural for the planet to be warming.
Carbon in the air stimulates plant life.
….while nut jobs like “greenpeace” have a plan to use chemicals to blot out the sun.
reply