amincd



Offline



Activity: 772

Merit: 500







Hero MemberActivity: 772Merit: 500 Re: Energy consumption could become an issue if bitcoin really breaks through April 27, 2013, 05:34:27 PM #61 Quote from: brenzi on April 21, 2013, 05:32:50 PM Quote from: benjamindees on April 21, 2013, 08:24:08 AM You're right. And I haven't checked your figures. But if you think that 7% is "significant", then we'll just have to agree to disagree. As pointed out, this is well within the range of energy already used for heat in colder areas.



Heating with electricity is a stupid option in the environmental sense because each Joule of electrically produced heat causes even more primary energy consumption at the power plant because of low efficiency. Heating with electricity is a stupid option in the environmental sense because each Joule of electrically produced heat causes even more primary energy consumption at the power plant because of low efficiency.

But heating with electricity is done right now in many places, because it's more convenient than other methods in some cases. In the scenario where bitcoin becomes the world's main currency, then all of those heaters could be dual-purpose devices that also produce bitcoin.



Also there is a lot of waste energy all over the world that could be used, since bitcoin can be produced any where in the world with electricity, and can be sent a lot more easily than electricity can be transmitted.



Finally, the block subsidy will eventually end, and the block generation reward will become only what block generators get from transaction fees, which could and likely will result in the block reward being a much lower percentage of the total market capitalization of bitcoin than it is now. But heating with electricity is done right now in many places, because it's more convenient than other methods in some cases. In the scenario where bitcoin becomes the world's main currency, then all of those heaters could be dual-purpose devices that also produce bitcoin.Also there is a lot of waste energy all over the world that could be used, since bitcoin can be produced any where in the world with electricity, and can be sent a lot more easily than electricity can be transmitted.Finally, the block subsidy will eventually end, and the block generation reward will become only what block generators get from transaction fees, which could and likely will result in the block reward being a much lower percentage of the total market capitalization of bitcoin than it is now.

wrenchmonkey



Offline



Activity: 224

Merit: 100









Full MemberActivity: 224Merit: 100 Re: Energy consumption could become an issue if bitcoin really breaks through April 28, 2013, 11:29:12 PM #66 Quote from: herzmeister on April 27, 2013, 10:12:13 PM

what about the Absorption Refrigerator someone mentioned? Why are the electric ones mainly used in hotel rooms only so far? Can't be that they're less efficient then.

The question is, less efficient than WHAT? Are they less efficient than using electricity to heat the solution to create the heat absorbtion effect? Yes. That, and the fact that they're not as compact as electric units.



If you don't already have a waste heat source, it's not worth the extra space consideration of such a system, even if it's a little more efficient, so nobody uses them.



Now, fast-forward to some distant point in the future. People are burning lots of juice to mine bitcoin. In the winter, this is a great system, because waste heat can be used for everything from heating buildings, to heating water (potable, swimming pools, hot tubs, whatever). In the summer this is a problem. You got countless BTUs of heat that you need to get rid of, as well as a building to cool (including keeping your mining hardware cool). Enter absorption refrigeration. You can now use those BTUs of waste heat to cool your building, or even do industrial refrigeration. Combine a mining farm with a food packaging plant? You were gonna burn that energy to refrigerate the food anyway, right? Why not harness that wasted energy and also mine some money. It's win/win/win. How about combining a mega-mining operation with a mega casino? Can you imagine what amount of electricity is spent on just cooling a casino floor? Let alone cooling 3000-5000 hotel rooms?



There's no reason that "waste heat" has to actually be wasted. The question is, less efficient than WHAT? Are they less efficient than using electricity to heat the solution to create the heat absorbtion effect? Yes. That, and the fact that they're not as compact as electric units.If you don't already have a waste heat source, it's not worth the extra space consideration of such a system, even if it's a little more efficient, so nobody uses them.Now, fast-forward to some distant point in the future. People are burning lots of juice to mine bitcoin. In the winter, this is a great system, because waste heat can be used for everything from heating buildings, to heating water (potable, swimming pools, hot tubs, whatever). In the summer this is a problem. You got countless BTUs of heat that you need to get rid of, as well as a building to cool (including keeping your mining hardware cool). Enter absorption refrigeration. You can now use those BTUs of waste heat to cool your building, or even do industrial refrigeration. Combine a mining farm with a food packaging plant? You were gonna burn that energy to refrigerate the food anyway, right? Why not harness that wasted energy and also mine some money. It's win/win/win. How about combining a mega-mining operation with a mega casino? Can you imagine what amount of electricity is spent on just cooling a casino floor? Let alone cooling 3000-5000 hotel rooms?There's no reason that "waste heat" has to actually be wasted.



Buy and sell mining shares (Bitfury). Block Erupter Overclocking 447 M/Hash, .006 (discounts if done in quantity) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=300206.msg3218480#msg3218480 Buy and sell mining shares (Bitfury). https://cex.io/r/1/wrenchmonkey/0/

halfawake



Offline



Activity: 490

Merit: 500







Hero MemberActivity: 490Merit: 500 Re: Energy consumption could become an issue if bitcoin really breaks through May 17, 2013, 09:38:39 PM #68 Flaff made a point that I think this entire debate was missing. Yes, mining bitcoins has a price beyond just the cost of the ASICs, in electricity. But how much energy do all the banks in the states use, not even counting the ones elsewhere in the world? You could count just the energy the banks use directly, but I think it'd be more fair to count the banks' energy, the energy used by the armored cars transporting money, that used by the Federal Reserve, and so on and so forth.



That's not even getting into the energy used to encrypt credit card transactions online. Actually, with the speed of computers currently, that's the cheap part of the cost: you just have to pay for an SSL certificate. The expensive part is making sure websites comply with PCI Compliance and so on. That may be derailing the conversation somewhat but it's to make a point: there's a real opportunity cost in accepting credit cards.



Granted, if you're selling things online and not accepting credit cards, for most markets you're pretty much shooting yourself in the foot. But the bitcoin protocal handles all that security so that if all the world used bitcoin instead of credit cards, e-commerce websites wouldn't have to worry about these things. In other words: how much energy does PayPal use? Even if credit card transactions are being done and not PayPal transactions, they are often still using PayPal as a credit card processor.



So the question to me isn't, does the bitcoin network use energy? But rather, does the bitcoin network use more energy than the traditional financial network? And, would it use more if it scaled up to the volume of, say, Visa and became a replacement for Visa in many cases. BTC: 13kJEpqhkW5MnQhWLvum7N5v8LbTAhzeWj

hashman



Offline



Activity: 1264

Merit: 1007







LegendaryActivity: 1264Merit: 1007 Re: Energy consumption could become an issue if bitcoin really breaks through May 20, 2013, 04:11:37 PM #70 Quote from: brenzi on April 20, 2013, 09:43:07 PM

This means that the bitcoin network by itself would raise global electricity consumption by up to 7%







Energy consumption *could* become an issue?

Energy consumption is a huge issue. Some key facts which prove humans are extremely stupid:





1) More than half of all hydrocarbon energy of our spaceship earth already was burned off with no attempt at use or capture ("natural gas flaring").



2) Continued pouring of energy as visible light away from Earth at night for no fucking reason at all (see pictures of the Earth from space).



3) Horrendous inefficient use of energy for transport, including millions of folks bringing 2 tons of steel huge distances every day with them.



4) So-called "defense" or "military" using energy just to destroy other energy, in efforts to demonstrate how psychotic they are so other folks will be afraid of them.





Yes, piss-poor use of energy resources is a *huge* problem on spaceship earth right now. No, proof of work networks don't add meaningfully to the total. But yes, it is something we should think about, so my apologies for getting upset. It happens whenever the topic comes up.







Energy consumption *could* become an issue?Energy consumption is a huge issue. Some key facts which prove humans are extremely stupid:1) More than half of all hydrocarbon energy of our spaceship earth already was burned off with no attempt at use or capture ("natural gas flaring").2) Continued pouring of energy as visible light away from Earth at night for no fucking reason at all (see pictures of the Earth from space).3) Horrendous inefficient use of energy for transport, including millions of folks bringing 2 tons of steel huge distances every day with them.4) So-called "defense" or "military" using energy just to destroy other energy, in efforts to demonstrate how psychotic they are so other folks will be afraid of them.Yes, piss-poor use of energy resources is a *huge* problem on spaceship earth right now. No, proof of work networks don't add meaningfully to the total. But yes, it is something we should think about, so my apologies for getting upset. It happens whenever the topic comes up.

Spendulus



Offline



Activity: 2730

Merit: 1342









LegendaryActivity: 2730Merit: 1342 Re: Energy consumption could become an issue if bitcoin really breaks through May 21, 2013, 12:11:26 PM #71 Quote from: wrenchmonkey on April 25, 2013, 08:55:57 PM Quote from: brenzi on April 25, 2013, 06:43:35 PM Quote from: wrenchmonkey on April 25, 2013, 05:43:24 PM but if you look at it from the perspective that energy costs can also drive people to move toward their own energy generation (Solar, Wind, Tidal, etc), in order to be competitive in that market, the total energy consumption isn't as relavent as the source of that energy being consumed.



If you think of the trilions of gigawatts of energy that are wasted by not harnessing the Sun's power... There's not a big issue with consuming a lot of energy.



In the far future you might even be right. There are clever people around that think energy will be 100% renewable and almost for free in the future. But I think we should consider the status quo and not rely on utopia when judging weaknesses of today's bitcoin technology. Bitcoin value might rise a lot faster than renewable energy will progress.



In the case of Photovoltaics one should bear in mind that today PV cells are produced in china using non-renewable energy. So their embodied energy is not renewable at all.



As long as renewable energy is more expensive than fossil and nuclear energy, I consider excessive energy use as being bad because real costs are externalized.

In the far future you might even be right. There are clever people around that think energy will be 100% renewable and almost for free in the future. But I think we should consider the status quo and not rely on utopia when judging weaknesses of today's bitcoin technology. Bitcoin value might rise a lot faster than renewable energy will progress.In the case of Photovoltaics one should bear in mind that today PV cells are produced in china using non-renewable energy. So their embodied energy is not renewable at all.As long as renewable energy is more expensive than fossil and nuclear energy, I consider excessive energy use as being bad because real costs are externalized.

....just because something is produced using another type of energy makes it not 'clean energy' is disingenuous at best. In order for that statement to be true, it would require that every cell produced consumes more 'dirty' energy in the the production process than it will produce in its working lifetime, which, if that were the case, solar energy would already make ZERO economic sense. People would never be able to come out ahead, as the solar installation would cost more in energy costs alone to produce, than would ever be recovered...



But in so doing you asserted based on the absolutes..."every cell produced"..."zero economic sense"...



and economics of A vs B is never based on absolutes. We see solar cells used for ranch gate openers - GOOD. For city stop signs and other markers where there'd be a high cost to run the power wires - GOOD. For a city stop sign right next to a power line - STUPID.



This isn't terribly complicated unless you preface the argument with a moral premise such as SOLAR = GOOD, then proceed in a twisted and warped fashion to ignore actual numbers because you've predefined GOOD.



In fact, you've argued against the other poster who simply stated that externalized costs (and pollution) have to be entered into the equation. Sorry, you can't do that.

Haven't you just disproved your own argument?But in so doing you asserted based on the absolutes..."every cell produced"..."zero economic sense"...and economics of A vs B is never based on absolutes. We see solar cells used for ranch gate openers - GOOD. For city stop signs and other markers where there'd be a high cost to run the power wires - GOOD. For a city stop sign right next to a power line - STUPID.This isn't terribly complicated unless you preface the argument with a moral premise such as SOLAR = GOOD, then proceed in a twisted and warped fashion to ignore actual numbers because you've predefined GOOD.In fact, you've argued against the other poster who simply stated that externalized costs (and pollution) have to be entered into the equation. Sorry, you can't do that.

halfawake



Offline



Activity: 490

Merit: 500







Hero MemberActivity: 490Merit: 500 Re: Energy consumption could become an issue if bitcoin really breaks through May 21, 2013, 08:52:59 PM #72 Quote from: brenzi on May 20, 2013, 01:46:22 PM

I tried to estimate this in this previous post. You are right that one should compare it to today's banking usage. But keep in mind that banking is not just about issuing and transferring money. There are services included that bitcoin doesn't supply and never will (funds/asset management, customer services, loans....)

...





I would be very interested in the figures, but they might be hard to get. But please read my linked post. If you can show me with quotes to reliable sources that the ratio of (paypal transaction volume)/(paypal plus credit cards energy use) is better than in the case of bitcoin, I'll be more than glad to change my opinion. I came to the conclusion that bitcoin's ratio is worse by orders of magnitude.



I would happily give you the figures if I could, but you have a valid point that they're hard to get. I don't work for paypal / ebay and even if I did I probably wouldn't have access to that kind of information. I'm not arguing the original point, bitcoin IS an energy hog, that's probably its biggest weakness. Just trying to make a comparison and unfortunately it's not a very good comparison because I simply don't have the data to compare it to.



I'm also not really sure I buy your point about bitcoin being unable to supply all the services you listed. Can it supply customer services? Probably not very well. But funds / asset management, and loans? I don't see why not. I don't think bitcoin is mature enough to do it yet, but that doesn't mean that it's impossible. The hardest part would be loans and that may very well have to be pegged to some fiat currency to be possible, so I could be wrong about it being possible. Easy? No, it'd be quite tricky to do based on the very nature of bitcoin. But probably not impossible. I would happily give you the figures if I could, but you have a valid point that they're hard to get. I don't work for paypal / ebay and even if I did I probably wouldn't have access to that kind of information. I'm not arguing the original point, bitcoin IS an energy hog, that's probably its biggest weakness. Just trying to make a comparison and unfortunately it's not a very good comparison because I simply don't have the data to compare it to.I'm also not really sure I buy your point about bitcoin being unable to supply all the services you listed. Can it supply customer services? Probably not very well. But funds / asset management, and loans? I don't see why not. I don't think bitcoin is mature enough to do it yet, but that doesn't mean that it's impossible. The hardest part would be loans and that may very well have to be pegged to some fiat currency to be possible, so I could be wrong about it being possible. Easy? No, it'd be quite tricky to do based on the very nature of bitcoin. But probably not impossible. BTC: 13kJEpqhkW5MnQhWLvum7N5v8LbTAhzeWj

Etlase2



Offline



Activity: 798

Merit: 1000







Hero MemberActivity: 798Merit: 1000 Re: Energy consumption could become an issue if bitcoin really breaks through May 21, 2013, 10:08:04 PM #73 Quote from: halfawake on May 21, 2013, 08:52:59 PM I'm also not really sure I buy your point about bitcoin being unable to supply all the services you listed. Can it supply customer services? Probably not very well. But funds / asset management, and loans? I don't see why not. I don't think bitcoin is mature enough to do it yet, but that doesn't mean that it's impossible. The hardest part would be loans and that may very well have to be pegged to some fiat currency to be possible, so I could be wrong about it being possible. Easy? No, it'd be quite tricky to do based on the very nature of bitcoin. But probably not impossible.



He is saying that bitcoin does not replace those services. e.g. they will still use the energy that they do now, even if they are operating with bitcoin. So it is not fair to use the lights that a bank uses to operate as part of the energy cost of fiat because it is related to the energy cost of money in general. He is saying that bitcoin does not replace those services. e.g. they will still use the energy that they do now, even if they are operating with bitcoin. So it is not fair to use the lights that a bank uses to operate as part of the energy cost of fiat because it is related to the energy cost ofin general. Decrits