Topic: “A single bitcoin transaction could power the average US household for a month" (Read 273 times)

Don't forget the war machine that is responsible for ensuring the continued value of USD. The US military uses far more power than bitcoin does. We're talking tens of millions of gallons of fuel burned per day.

This is actually a hilarious way of looking at it. They say a single bitcoin transaction could power a US household for a month. I just made a transaction which paid ~300 sats in fees, which is equal to 12 cents. So, if what they say is true, then energy companies must be charging every household in the US a mark up of 100,000% over the true cost of energy.

This makes what they say not an argument against bitcoin, but rather an argument against energy companies.

I just spent 20c on a single bitcoin transaction. An average US household spends about $130 a month on power.

Again this energy consumption issue being raised without any basis and each time they come up with this bullishit they start making weird comparison like this time average household consumption for month.

Why in the hell they always have the issue with it? The answer is they fear it and don't want people to have belief over it because it can end up their false monopoly in existence from hundreds of years and they can loose control of the financial system from their hands and spit out these bullshit things.

It's usually more than bitcoin mining so transaction is not even minute part of it but they don't care about it because they are circulating and lending people fiat the legal tender of their country but even btc usage with renewable resources hurt them

Here is an data illustrating this energy consumption of banking system,gold and bitcoin mining and you can have the results in front of you clearly :



There are on average hundred thousand of banks running in the US only and their energy consumption is too high emitting carbons in the air from these Air conditioner but that doesn't affect the environment.

The whole world combined usage is much more and bitcoin is Just fraction of it and if something that is capable of providing fund ownership with decentralised control then it's worth it :



So whatever they say you don't need to trust them and keep holding your coins and stay strong..

That's actually a lot, right?

Seems like they are publishing such articles when the 'save the earth' is the current trend on the internet nowadays. They are trying to prove their point while the people are worried about our planet. As we already know, these people are just waiting for some opportunities to talk negatively about bitcoins and as soon as they see some theory, they quickly concluded it to reality as they pleased. 

Ok, How many Fileserver/switches/routers/computers/printers/Airconitioners have to run in secure Server rooms to run the 1000s of Banks in the World? Do they calculate the energy used to run the Fiat Banking system?

Ask them to calculate how much "energy" is used to mint a single coin. (I am talking about the mining process to get the copper, zinc and nickel that are used in the manufacturing and minting of coins... then the melting process and the minting process and the transport of those coins to it's final destination) 

I think one of our own Crypto supporters must make those calculations and then publish that. 

I guess once these F@_k_rs in the government want to keep trying to bring down anything they will continue to push all these false narratives like we continue to see with Bitcoin mining even though there has been proof of several other aspects of the economy that actually uses more energy than Bitcoin mining and as you said, the average Joe who might not even have the time to check might just fall for these lies and I believe they have found a new argument, (POS).

They know they are lying and we know they are lying, but does average Joe knows they are lying? I doubt it, when a lie is told in such a way, without any doubts about the veracity of it, the average Joe is simply going to believe it, because for him it is impossible that politicians can lie so openly, so at least there must be some truth behind it, or at least that is what they think, so I will not be surprised to see in the future attempts by politicians to ban POW and force bitcoin to move to POS.

Here's my most recent favorite take on bitcoin energy consumption to add to my list of comparisons, showing that bitcoin energy consumption is absolutely and totally inconsequential: https://nitter.net/csuwildcat/status/1361428342877032452

Clothes dryers in the US alone use electricity than bitcoin does. I've never seen climate activists rally against clothes dryers. Where is the "Clothes Dryer Global Energy Consumption Index"? Where is the outcry? Where is the legislation banning clothes dryers, when everyone could just switch to the completely free air drying instead, not to mention all the saved e-waste from old clothes dryers being thrown away. It's scandalous! People spending money for a simple convenience? Unacceptable!

Climate change is real and it is an issue which needs addressed, but attacking bitcoin, which uses a tiny fraction of global energy, and uses a higher proportion of green energy than any other industry, is just plain stupid. If everyone stopped watching quite so much porn, or hung their clothes up to dry every once in a while, or turned devices off instead of leaving them on standby, or even just turned off lights in the rooms they weren't in, we would save much more energy than bitcoin consumes. Anyone attacking bitcoin because of its energy use, but ignoring all these other things, is either an idiot or is being paid to say these things.

This is so wrong I can't even bother wasting my time to argue with this BS.
If every BTC transaction could power an average US household for a month,how could the BTC blockchain consume as much electricity as Greece?Greece has a population of around 10 million people,while the USA has the population of more than 320 million people.This doesn't make any sense,but I'm not surprised.All the BTC haters and FUDsters don't make any sense these days.They simply can't create logical theories about how bad Bitcoin actually is(and how good the PoS altcoins actually are).

I think they are now electing some uneducated people who are saying anything like child prodigy in the fight having senseless talks.Like seriously? Having environment issues for btc mining was not sufficient enough for them and now they are making such crap comparison.But still we know they are going to talk the same way and the people don't care about them now.They will never make comparisons of how much energy the other sectors consume because they owned them.

This is one of the oldest and most used strategies both invented and mainly used in United States. The bogeyman strategy. If they want sheeple to fear something, they have to build a big bogeyman out of it and to do that they need to convince them somehow specially if there is no truth to that. The main part of this strategy is telling the biggest lie they can.

They tried telling sheeple bitcoin is a Ponzi scheme, too risky to buy, is gonna die, China (the other bogeyman strategy) controls bitcoin, is used for illegal shit, ... and all of them failed.
Now they are trying a new lie about the energy consumption and it is a good one since a lot of places including US itself are having a lot of energy related problems (they either have problem keeping the lights on or the prices are soaring or both!). They also can't just tell you "bitcoin is using a lot of energy" because sheeple won't feel it to their bones, they have to tell them "a single bitcoin tx uses more electricity than single one of you the sheeple".

easy debunk should anyone dare say this silly story in topics post out aloud seriously (without the implied satire of the topic creator)

ASICS have no hard drive, nor ram and they never see a transaction. they dont collate transactions.

the electricity used is the same whether a block is empty or full.
the electricity has no bearing on transactions at all.
the transactions has no bearing on electricity at all.

This kinda feels like a useless comparison when only 22% of energy used in the US is actually used residentially: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/use-of-energy/

I saw a report about a year ago that suggested a transaction caused the emission of more CO2 than the average Netherlands household per month - I wonder what country we'll be seeing next...

I am still shocked, the average US household uses power supply steadily, and if. A single transaction of Bitcoin can actually power a household for a month then imagine the amount of Bitcoin transactions that is going on around the world in a day, this is to say bitcoin mining is not a basement kid game anymore, I would ask now that all this power that are being used how environmental friendly are they? And what’s the best source of these source of power.

Ahh yes. Alex de Vries, well known for being an employee of fiat banks and being paid by fiat banks to write poor quality articles based on erroneous or even entirely missing data repeatedly spreading lies about bitcoin's energy consumption, as I've pointed out before. I'm absolutely sure this time will be different. He works for the same bank which is leading CBDC development in Europe and which wanted to implement KYC for addresses in your own wallets. Totally unbiased I'm sure.

Here is more information about why all his stuff is completely full of shit:
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/business/not-science-digiconomist-bitcoin
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/elon-musk-bitcoin-environment-wrong

His data is wrong, his conclusions are wrong, and therefore this letter which references him and only him is also wrong.

The mining will continue until morale improves. 

Does it matter? They're probably dividing the computational power required for solving one block with the transactions that it includes, which is ridiculous. By this line of reasoning, a transaction in a block, that's nearly full, is thousands of times more environmentally friendly than a coinbase transaction from an empty block.

Incredible really that these imbeciles are still embarrassing themselves with these uninformed, completely & utterly pathetic statements. They are so far from reality, it’s not even funny. I guess it just shows we are still early.

Putting such info without a reference to a particular research (I checked the reference provided for the next sentence (de Vries et al) just in case that article contained info about a US household, and it does not) is very unfair because this statement certainly isn't common knowledge and is dubious. Also, even if such estimates were somehow accurate, I'd ask additional questions. For example, how does it compare to a bank transaction? Another one is will it proportionately remain the same, or will each transaction 'cost' less power if there are more of them (mass adoption)? And also about other things that also require a lot of power but can be avoided. I guess people post that stuff because they want to believe it and they think their audience will buy it.

Apart from waste and synonymous with environmental destruction for the surrounding community. And what's worse, we get the attached letter signed by several people including Brad Sherman, Jamaal Bowman, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Jesús G., García and Marie Newman are people who have no relationship or ownership whatsoever regarding Bitcoin. What about the rest? Are there reports from nearby residents that were actually attached to submit a letter of application for mining actions? Unfortunately, we didn't find it until now. The letter or application is only signed by a member of parliament who says that his residence is close to the mine. If so how close? how much distance has an impact on pollution? greenhouse effect etc?

Btw the article was made by Jesse Hamilton in which he asserts:


Why is there no comparison test of the impact of mining Bitcoin with mining for oil, gas, coal, gold, etc. that damage the environment is very clear.

"A single bitcoin transaction could power the average U.S. household for a month"

**Mind blowing shits ＼（〇_ｏ）／

Source: According to the estimates of researchers.
Ressearchers: Trust me bro.

At least provide accurate or estimate of those data and statistics of this claim.