Martin SeegerApr 17, 2024

If you do 12 Bitcoin transactions per year, you use a higher amount of energy than we use for a complete family (including: heating, warm water, electricity, car charging) in the same year. We do all via electricity.

From: @tkinias
https://historians.social/@tkinias/112283441665687815

Thanasis Kinias (@[email protected])

I just read that a single Bitcoin transaction requires upwards of 1,000 kW-hr of electricity. That’s like running a small air conditioner 24/7 for a month and a half. Edit: This got way more attention than I expected from an offhand remark; I guess it hit a nerve on here! But I’m going to have to mute this, as it’s taken over my notifications...

Mastodon
Show threadGoblinApr 17, 2024

@masek @tkinias That sounded so ridiculous I did a quick websearch to check the numbers and it checks out. I found values between 800 and 1800 kwh.

How the f*** is this s*** still around??? 🤯

Show threadMeltingPenguins 🍉🤠Apr 17, 2024
@goblin @masek @tkinias Because it makes rich people (especially in the graphiccard manufactoring and energy provider sector) richer
Show threadBoltApr 17, 2024

@meltingpenguins @goblin @masek @[email protected] graphics cards actually aren't often used anymore, due to them being unprofitable. They use dedicated mining rigs designed just to mine BTC.

The main reason they still use the wasteful "Proof of Work" (PoW) mechanism is because Bitcoin 'maximalists' don't like change, and refuse to adapt. It's gotten pretty cultish.

Every other major cryptocurrency uses a mechanism called "Proof of Stake" (PoS) which uses ~99.98% less power. BTC miners refuse to switch.

Show threadbojkotiMalbonaApr 17, 2024

@boltx @meltingpenguins @goblin @masek @tkinias To be clear, the problem is not wholly PoW, but specifically *old* PoW tech. From a scientific study¹:

“We illustrate that these kinds of blockchain technology already consume several orders of magnitude less energy than the first generation PoW blockchains and that these blockchains, thus, largely mitigate the energy problem.”

① https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-020-00656-x

The Energy Consumption of Blockchain Technology: Beyond Myth - Business & Information Systems Engineering

When talking about blockchain technology in academia, business, and society, frequently generalizations are still heared about its – supposedly inherent – enormous energy consumption. This perception inevitably raises concerns about the further adoption of blockchain technology, a fact that inhibits rapid uptake of what is widely considered to be a groundbreaking and disruptive innovation. However, blockchain technology is far from homogeneous, meaning that blanket statements about its energy consumption should be reviewed with care. The article is meant to bring clarity to the topic in a holistic fashion, looking beyond claims regarding the energy consumption of Bitcoin, which have, so far, dominated the discussion.

SpringerLink
Show threadBoltApr 17, 2024

@bojkotiMalbona @meltingpenguins @goblin @masek @[email protected] While the paper is certainly interesting, I don't think it's quite a good defense of new PoW chains.

As much as new PoW mechanisms might decrease energy use compared to Bitcoin's traditional PoW mechanics, a lot of that can be chalked up to them simply having less fee revenue, and thus less incentive to run more miners.

The graph in the paper should be Fee Revenue vs Energy, not Market Cap.

Show threadbojkotiMalbona

@boltx I’m not sure why fee revenue would even be a factor. There is a finite number of coins to mine and the (increasing) energy cost of mining each of them. That energy cost is fixed. Taking fees into account just muddies the waters AFAICT.

Many irrelevant factors influence the fees such as popularity/demand. Low fees would lower the /rate/ of mining, not the number of computations or the complexity of the work.

Apr 17, 2024 at 6:44pmWeb
Show threadBoltApr 17, 2024

@bojkotiMalbona Fee revenue would be a major factor, because fees also provide incentives, on top of newly minted coins.

Fees are a representation of demand, so low demand = low fees = lower rewards for miners = less mining/hashpower.

And low fees would actually lower the amount of computations & work complexity, as it adjusts based on average block times (see: https://www.coindesk.com/learn/bitcoin-mining-difficulty-everything-you-need-to-know/)

Especially as chains like Bitcoin have halvings, fees become a larger % of rewards, and have more influence.