https://jwz.org/b/ykdm
@jwz I'm pretty sure it's not less efficient, thermally speaking, than just running the same amount of electricity through a big resistor. However many kWh of electricity you use, 100% of it should end up as heat.
...but it is less efficient than running it through a heat pump, which will allow you to extract extra heat from the external environment, allowing for significantly >100% heating efficiency.
@jwz The irony of the irony is though, the tulip mania didn’t hurt those who didn’t buy tulips.
As bitcoin’s value continues to inflate, it sucks value from the economy that actually produces something, and gives increasing slice of the economy & political power to those that run and profit off a system that produces nothing.
@AWStephen @jwz Correct. Increasing amount of financialization of the economy in general is a trend we’ve been seeing since the 1980’s.
It results in markets becoming increasingly disconnected from actual economic prospects of people.
The more money there is with the sole function of moving the market, the less of the total remains with any connection to actual economies producing anything.
Ironic, but honestly probably the best way to mine bitcoins. Those greenhouses apparently need to be heated for some reason, and that used to be powered by dirty energy. Powering it by solar panels is a lot better. But instead of simply throwing it through a heater, why not run a bunch of processors and let them do something useful? Or let them mine Bitcoin. They could be folding proteins or analyzing radio telescope signals instead, but the principle is sound.
Selling it back to the grid is apparently not an option, according to omroepbrabant.nl/nieuws/459627…
The linked article at jwz.org/blog/2024/11/bitcoin-t… seems to think carbon negative means turning CO2 into diamonds, but it's pretty obvious this setup is turning CO2 into tulips. Whether those are useful is another big question. If you believe in tulips and bitcoin, this is probably the best way to go about it. If you don't, it's an expensive waste of time and resources, but still carbon neutral. There are worse things in the world.
In het magazijn van ondernemer Frank uit Heeswijk-Dinther staan niet alleen spullen om deurklinken te leveren, maar ook een grote computer die Bitcoin-transacties verwerkt. Met deze computer houdt Frank zijn magazijn warm, waardoor hij minder gas hoeft te gebruiken. "Nu de koers van Bitcoin aan het stijgen is, is dit een fantastische ontwikkeling."
I'm no greenhouse expert, but I know they used to use a ton of fossil energy. I doubt they'd do that if it wasn't necessary, but if you have sources that say otherwise, I'll take your word for it.
@jwz Strange that you couldn't find a source as per the article. Goes to show how compartmentalised Google results for different languages are. I found two in Dutch from the same local (provincial) broadcaster, one already linked in the thread but that wasn't about greenhouses. This one is, and it's from half a year earlier, May 2022 https://www.omroepbrabant.nl/nieuws/4085845/zo-wordt-een-bitcoin-computer-gebruikt-om-bloemen-te-kweken
And a third one from the "Flowers & Plants News" trade publication, about a test of the same thing from Nov 2017! https://www.bpnieuws.nl/article/8013058/welke-tuinder-wil-er-in-de-bitcoins/
Tuinders staan onder zware druk vanwege de torenhoge energieprijzen. Er wordt daarom massaal gezocht naar alternatieven om kassen te verwarmen zónder er financieel aan onderdoor te gaan. In Nistelrode worden 'super-computers' ingezet om de kassen te verwarmen. De apparaten worden gebruikt om Bitcoin-transacties te verwerken. Met de warmte die ze produceren wordt een kas vol hortensia’s verwarmd.
I'm going to put my life savings in tulips now, what could go wrong.
@jwz I was between positive and negative but decided if it was positive it must be producing carbon
But I’m sure you knew what I meant 😜