So this is not the problem but good solution to the green field energy sources, isn't it. I guess there is also research or survey which states that banks are actually consuming lot of energy and thus the debate is non ending over the energy consumption. Why I am stating that one here? Well, if we make comparison then things can get more easier to understand and if bitcoin is becoming the core reason for the formation of green energy projects then it is anyway good start towards the eco-friendly energy generation projects.
Believe me sooner or later, bitcoin will able to cut the cost of setting up these projects and thus become first ever self-evolving project in the world. May be it cud happen that big mining farms will themselves create or build these projects besides their mining farm and run everything by themselves. Thus zero energy plus more output of the money and much more.
Topic: Bitcoin Mining Drives Green Energy Innovation (Read 294 times)
~
Good find! Merited you for that.
I didn't realize the US government was subsidizing the cost of coal power for bitcoin mining. (Bolded the parts which imply state subsidies)
Quote
~
They mislabel the programs as being "economic partnerships" and "job creation funds".
But in reality, I suspect those are clear cut examples of the government subsidizing coal power.
Without those state subsidies for coal, these bitcoin miners may have have opted for hydroelectric power instead.
The government could easily have chosen to subsidize wind, solar or hydroelectric energy instead of coal in these cases. Could be cases of economic protectionism driving the government to subsidize less environmentally friendly and less cost effective forms of energy.
Interesting cases here.
I thought I was 100% correct when I said there was no reason to select coal energy over hydroelectric. I never imagined governments would subsidize it.Well, I don't like John Oliver's view but he sometimes nails it. See this.
People in the government will subsidize everything if at least on paper it will bring them new jobs or help maintain the actual jobs. And in theory, it's a good thing, till you run into situations where the government is wasting more money than it would have spent by directly paying the wages of x10 more people.
You know from the discussions we've carried here I'm no fan of PoW (but no idea on how to change it
) and I'm no fan of painting BTC as the Virgin Mary in everything.Miners are business, they will burn coal, they will use solar, they will burn Care Bears for fuel if it's cheaper, they are not some non-profit organization, in reality, they are as ruthless as Chevron or Nestle....after all...they are doing this for the money not for anything else.
You and others have to understand that this so-called green energy innovation is close to propaganda. We have reached the moment where BTC has become a business, just like oil, gold or everything else. There are groups that are interested in painting an image, and they will do what others have done in the past, simply lie in your face.
Look at the article you've quoted:
Quote
Canada’s largest utility, Hydro-Quebec, is a perfect example. Reuters reports that “the province estimates it will have an energy surplus equivalent to 100 terawatt hours over the next 10 years. One terawatt hour powers 60,000 homes in Quebec during a year.”
Not surprisingly, Bitcoin mining operations have inundated Hydro-Quebec with applications to make use of the surplus. As such, profits have been steady, a whopping annual average of roughly $3 billion over the past four years.
Not surprisingly, Bitcoin mining operations have inundated Hydro-Quebec with applications to make use of the surplus. As such, profits have been steady, a whopping annual average of roughly $3 billion over the past four years.
Cryptominers are stuck in limbo as Hydro-Québec suspends requests for power
Canada's Quebec halts crypto mining projects, may raise fees
Where is the truth?
Interesting read.
I actually never realised that bitcoin was actually in fact using the overwhelming supply of sustainably produced electricity that far outweighs the demand normally within the energy markets. If that's the case, then that's simply more the reason to not be worrying about the non-issue of bitcoin energy consumption.
It's probably a huge contributing factor to why sustainable energy hasn't taken off fully yet, because there isn't enough profits being made from selling the energy at its full generation capacity. Bitcoin mining could be the equaliser here in terms of really being able to pick up the demand for the wasted energy.
Even without consuming this wasted energy, people need to start realising that bitcoin mining is no more harmful to Earth than something like banks processing transactions, simply because what matters more is how the energy is generated, not how much is used.
I actually never realised that bitcoin was actually in fact using the overwhelming supply of sustainably produced electricity that far outweighs the demand normally within the energy markets. If that's the case, then that's simply more the reason to not be worrying about the non-issue of bitcoin energy consumption.
It's probably a huge contributing factor to why sustainable energy hasn't taken off fully yet, because there isn't enough profits being made from selling the energy at its full generation capacity. Bitcoin mining could be the equaliser here in terms of really being able to pick up the demand for the wasted energy.
Even without consuming this wasted energy, people need to start realising that bitcoin mining is no more harmful to Earth than something like banks processing transactions, simply because what matters more is how the energy is generated, not how much is used.
As I live in the developing country I have not noticed any particular changes and innovations. Perhaps it is not my business but what countries are you talking about? I suppose you are talking about USA, EU, and probably some Asian countries. Anyway I like that the positive changes are being happened because of course it is an absurd to burn coal and other fossil in the 21 century. I hope that such tendencies will come to my country in the near or far future. By the way I am wondering is it profitable to use green energy instead of using traditional power sources?
There's no reason to utilize coal generated electricity in bitcoin mining operations.
Tell that to those guys in Montana:
https://www.ccn.com/u-s-senator-warns-closing-montana-coal-plant-will-hurt-bitcoin-mining-industry/
There isn't a scenario where a mining operation will opt for coal or oil above hydroelectric energy.
Well, if one is not enough:
Bitcoin mining’s growing demand for cheap energy revived a shuttered coal mine
You were saying....
Good find! Merited you for that.
I didn't realize the US government was subsidizing the cost of coal power for bitcoin mining. (Bolded the parts which imply state subsidies)
Quote
There is also the Bonner Bitcoin data center, which until recently was one of the largest in the world, as CCN reported two months ago. Last year, according to the Missoula Economic Partnership, an initiative aimed at promoting business activities in the Western Montana city of Missoula, the Bonner facility was expected to expand from the then 12,000 mining rigs to 55,000.
Montana’s pro-cryptocurrency bona fides are also proven by the fact that its state government is the first in the U.S. to offer a grant to a bitcoin mining operation. Last year in June, the governor of Montana, Steve Bullock, announced that out of the $1,124,030 that had been allocated as economic development grants to assist main street businesses in creating jobs, training employees, and planning for growth, $416,000 would go to a bitcoin miner named Project Spokane.
“Missoula County received $416,000 of BSTF Job Creation funds to assist Project Spokane, LLC to expand, which will allow the company to create 65 new jobs in Bonner,” said a press release from Bullock’s office. “The BSTF funds will be used for purchase of equipment, machinery, furniture and software and for wage reimbursement. Project Spokane, LLC is a data center that provides blockchain security services for the bitcoin network.”
Montana’s pro-cryptocurrency bona fides are also proven by the fact that its state government is the first in the U.S. to offer a grant to a bitcoin mining operation. Last year in June, the governor of Montana, Steve Bullock, announced that out of the $1,124,030 that had been allocated as economic development grants to assist main street businesses in creating jobs, training employees, and planning for growth, $416,000 would go to a bitcoin miner named Project Spokane.
“Missoula County received $416,000 of BSTF Job Creation funds to assist Project Spokane, LLC to expand, which will allow the company to create 65 new jobs in Bonner,” said a press release from Bullock’s office. “The BSTF funds will be used for purchase of equipment, machinery, furniture and software and for wage reimbursement. Project Spokane, LLC is a data center that provides blockchain security services for the bitcoin network.”
They mislabel the programs as being "economic partnerships" and "job creation funds".
But in reality, I suspect those are clear cut examples of the government subsidizing coal power.
Without those state subsidies for coal, these bitcoin miners may have have opted for hydroelectric power instead.
The government could easily have chosen to subsidize wind, solar or hydroelectric energy instead of coal in these cases. Could be cases of economic protectionism driving the government to subsidize less environmentally friendly and less cost effective forms of energy.
Interesting cases here.
I thought I was 100% correct when I said there was no reason to select coal energy over hydroelectric. I never imagined governments would subsidize it.
energy need is one of the most important problems of today. In particular, as mining becomes more widespread, the need for energy has increased even more, and some countries are experiencing energy problems. after that we need more green energy.
If the production of solar panels increses x2 times,their price will be reduced by 25%.This is proven to work and cryptocurrency mining can actually help for increasing the market demand for solar panels,hence their production.Countries like Germany will have huge amounts of cheap green energy,because they are using lots of solar panels during the last 20 years and their green energy investments had paid off.
The myth that crypto minng is wasting too much "dirty" electricity will be busted soon.
The myth that crypto minng is wasting too much "dirty" electricity will be busted soon.
Bitcoin mining does consume a lot of energy but virtually all of it comes from a sector with a low carbon footprint.
Currently the majority of miner are located in china.
And china's energy is to 66% generated by coal-fired power plants. That's by far not a 'low carbon footprint'.
Still.. compared to banks and their energy usage.. that's nothing in comparison.
This could help to make solar panels, hydroelectric plants and windmills more cost effective alternatives to fossil fuels on a kilowatt per dollar basis.
Using the unused energy from renewable sources which can't be injected into the grid for mining is a very nice idea.
I believe this can be established pretty cost-efficiently.
I just wish they would find a way to solve this problem of being power hungry, altcoins are not like that, they are very easy to mine and does not consume much of anything. I have seen a lot of them that are easy to setup and all you need is just your computer and a electricity.
Banks don't consume so much energy directly, we all know that, but banks support oil and coal companies, when you understand that you will see how bad banks are in all possible ways, they support wrong ideas.
World is not able to solve problem with energy at the moment, consumption is growing with fast rates, I hope that something will change, that we will see some breakthrough in finding source of renewable energy big enough to supply entire world, but for now we have enemies that oppose that ideas and we know who they are, banking sector, oil and coal sectors, they are strong and they won't let new things to rise, they are centralized entities, that's why people should support decentralization, it's the light in the dark tunnel.
Bitcoin mining does consume a lot of energy but virtually all of it comes from a sector with a low carbon footprint.
Currently the majority of miner are located in china.
And china's energy is to 66% generated by coal-fired power plants. That's by far not a 'low carbon footprint'.
Still.. compared to banks and their energy usage.. that's nothing in comparison.
This could help to make solar panels, hydroelectric plants and windmills more cost effective alternatives to fossil fuels on a kilowatt per dollar basis.
Using the unused energy from renewable sources which can't be injected into the grid for mining is a very nice idea.
I believe this can be established pretty cost-efficiently.
I just wish they would find a way to solve this problem of being power hungry, altcoins are not like that, they are very easy to mine and does not consume much of anything. I have seen a lot of them that are easy to setup and all you need is just your computer and a electricity.
Otherwise, perhaps we should shut down Visa and Mastercard's networks then?
In that sense we can just as easily shut down the entire banking system. This whole Bitcoin's energy consumption circus is being rehashed over and over again just because there is nothing else of negative nature to highlight.Back in the days Bitcoin was constantly blamed for criminal use, and now that's no longer a thing with how people have noticed that there is no privacy in Bitcoin, skeptics have to find something else to moan about.
It's funny how so many people claim that Bitcoin is worthless, but yet they find it interesting enough to keep talking about it, and that year after year. It's likely that these skeptics will become future Bitcoin users.
If it was that worthless they would just ignore it.
Bitcoin miners would surely opt for greener sources of energy if it were cheaper and easily accessible, but given that traditional coal power plants are giving their arm and leg to get such deals on these power-hungry miners, I'd say that most of the time, mining operators are still getting their energy from such traditional sources.
It will take years before renewable energy becomes widely available and efficient enough to cover electricity needs in areas where weather is not suitable for this kind of investment. Recently, a New York firm started using an old dam as a place for mining Bitcoin. Cheap, renewable energy and there should not be any problems with cooling. That investment should pay off quite fast.
I really like Antonopolous and OP approach to Bitcoin green subsidy capability. In my opinion it is a very valid point but it only counterbalance the negative effects which are them very present.
By negative I mean that theoretical perpetual race towards more hashrate and more energy consumptipn which in the end is more waste than anything else. I wonder what solutions outside of the free market there really is to.limit this waste.
By negative I mean that theoretical perpetual race towards more hashrate and more energy consumptipn which in the end is more waste than anything else. I wonder what solutions outside of the free market there really is to.limit this waste.
Bitcoin miners would surely opt for greener sources of energy if it were cheaper and easily accessible, but given that traditional coal power plants are giving their arm and leg to get such deals on these power-hungry miners, I'd say that most of the time, mining operators are still getting their energy from such traditional sources. Also, the setup for greener, low-carbon energy production is still not viable for large-scale operations that only a small percentage of users are enjoying it, though miners, if they have the money, can create one themselves and just use their harnessed energy for their operations.
It will be a long qay before greener energy is available for households and industries alike, knowing that the demand for coal-powered energy is still over the roof.
It will be a long qay before greener energy is available for households and industries alike, knowing that the demand for coal-powered energy is still over the roof.
Currently the majority of miner are located in china.
And china's energy is to 66% generated by coal-fired power plants. That's by far not a 'low carbon footprint'.
And china's energy is to 66% generated by coal-fired power plants. That's by far not a 'low carbon footprint'.
There's no reason to utilize coal generated electricity in bitcoin mining operations.
Tell that to those guys in Montana:
https://www.ccn.com/u-s-senator-warns-closing-montana-coal-plant-will-hurt-bitcoin-mining-industry/
There isn't a scenario where a mining operation will opt for coal or oil above hydroelectric energy.
Well, if one is not enough:
Bitcoin mining’s growing demand for cheap energy revived a shuttered coal mine
You were saying....
Green energy has become one of the rapidly increasing industry in the world. As world moves more to digitization there is a huge demand of energy and there is necessity of clean and green energy. And with the use of bitcoin and other currencies there seems we will have a high demand in future too.
You're right that bitcoin or other digital currencies have a high demand for our nature, but it is a unavoidable thing in future. People just probably moan and speculate about the high consume energy of bitcoin but they hardly to stop it. The growth and improvement of digital currency will always continue, even it is claimed consuming much energy.
I remember reading an article on bitcoin mining where there was a proposed idea to create a hydroelectric dam that would generate clean energy for the miners.
If I remember correctly it was a Chinese entrepreneur that had this in mind, so I guess there is some indirect drive (from bitcoin) to create energy from renewable sources.
If I remember correctly it was a Chinese entrepreneur that had this in mind, so I guess there is some indirect drive (from bitcoin) to create energy from renewable sources.
Quote
consuming power that would otherwise go to waste.
I don't know if this is actually happening, but it does sound plausible as I'd assume that countries with surplus electricity supplies would have pretty cheap, which attracts bitcoin miners there.
Obviously, the main message behind all this is that it doesn't really matter how much energy something uses, as long as it is reasonable, it is producing something of benefit, and most importantly, energy sources are sustainable and renewable (green).
I think it's definitely possible for bitcoin mining to produce demand for cheap, locally sourced energy, which generally is hydro at the moment, though this process could take time. Bottom line is that I don't think that people should be worried about bitcoin's energy consumption as much as they do right now. It's minuscule in the grand scheme of things, and as long as it uses responsibly generated energy, it really is a non-issue. Otherwise, perhaps we should shut down Visa and Mastercard's networks then?
Green energy has become one of the rapidly increasing industry in the world. As world moves more to digitization there is a huge demand of energy and there is necessity of clean and green energy. And with the use of bitcoin and other currencies there seems we will have a high demand in future too.
Currently the majority of miner are located in china.
And china's energy is to 66% generated by coal-fired power plants. That's by far not a 'low carbon footprint'.
And china's energy is to 66% generated by coal-fired power plants. That's by far not a 'low carbon footprint'.
There's no reason to utilize coal generated electricity in bitcoin mining operations.
Hydroelectric power is cheaper than coal or oil. There is also often a large surplus in hydroelectric power due to regional and geographic constraints. The best application for bitcoin mining is hydroelectric power by far.
There isn't a scenario where a mining operation will opt for coal or oil above hydroelectric energy. This is due to bitcoin mining being extremely mobile and not having location constraints. All that is required is internet access, which allows miners to shop around for the lowest cost per watt supplier to meet their energy demands.
Bitcoin mining does consume a lot of energy but virtually all of it comes from a sector with a low carbon footprint.
Currently the majority of miner are located in china.
And china's energy is to 66% generated by coal-fired power plants. That's by far not a 'low carbon footprint'.
Still.. compared to banks and their energy usage.. that's nothing in comparison.
This could help to make solar panels, hydroelectric plants and windmills more cost effective alternatives to fossil fuels on a kilowatt per dollar basis.
Using the unused energy from renewable sources which can't be injected into the grid for mining is a very nice idea.
I believe this can be established pretty cost-efficiently.
Jump to: