Topic: Debunking the "Bitcoin is an environmental disaster" argument. - page 11. (Read 5223 times)

Ok, let's stop all the bitcoin mining for 1 year, how many do you think will die because of that?
Let's stop the oil industry for 1 month! War-z was heaven compared to what will happen.
How about we stop that comparison just for the sake of finding something that consumes more than the bitcoin network?


It's called propaganda.
If you look at how the coal and oil mining industry and on the other side the so-called renewable energy are throwing figures around you will have quite the headache as nothing would make sense. Add a bit of data from the nuclear industry and you realize one thing, everyone is lying to protect their interest.
What's bitcoin fault in this? None, it was caught in the middle of a stupid discussion and now everybody is trying to fight for their interest, quite normal after all it's all about money, some go for a reason, some start throwing around figures they know are fake because they know the others can't disprove with them.

I could claim to know that bitcoin burns 80% of coal-generated energy or 90% of pure eolian wind.
Nobody could come up with a claim other than studies that correlate, extrapolate, and mastu...let's leave it like that, data, nobody could come with solid figures to disapprove any of those scenarios because there is simply no data.

As you said, is weird, of course, it is!
Till now everyone was saying all that Chinese hashrate is coming from hydro, 60% of it is clean!
Now miners are moving to Kazakhstan which could barely power 5% of the entire hashrate with all their hydropower they produce in that country and with the rest coming from fossils and suddenly.. we're greener! Of course it's strange because it's impossible!!!!

It's one of the two:
a) either the mix previously was far more polluting with more coal burned in China and they were lying
b) the energy mix was perfectly clean and ....this whole thing is a lie!

And the most annoying thing is the duplicity here, this mini council comes with those numbers, good, we have renewables, etc.
Yet when it comes to press releases, they make this kind of claims:


1/3 of their hashrate is getting deployed at a datacenter power by coal, yet...they seek renewables. Bs!

Yup, I couldn't agree more. I really hope this drama ends soon, because BTC is a viable invention for future financial solutions.  If a lot of people shout that BTC is not environmentally friendly, it's just a rant.  Even gold, which is an investment asset that has been trusted for a long time, also damages the environment.  If you want very real evidence without thinking hard, just look on google "project freeport Indonesia" how mountains turn into ravines just because they want to dredge the existing gold.

Well, the point is that the crypto Ban in China has nothing to do with the environment. The party just wanted to regulate an industry it was becoming too powerful and with an orthogonal agenda to theirs.
In fact, the party banned mining because it interacted the wrong way with their CBDC plans. Who would use a digital Yuan, monitored, controlled and tracked by Chinese regulators, if Bitcoin is freely and widely available all over the country?

This is the real reason, masked under the idiotic ESG moratorium of a "polluting industry".

As you point out, the biggest dams are in China. This has to do with the massive costs these structures bear with them. And I am not referring only to financial costs, that make these structures available only for unlimited funded entities (read: Nation states) but also environmental (the creation of a lake where it wasn't supposed to be)  and social (relocation of thousands of people). It this not by chance that in Europe or Northern America these kinds of infrastructures have not being built since a few decades.

Also, their move displaced much investments already completed in China:

Hydropower plants go on sale in China amid mining crackdown and bitcoin slump

I agree, the Chinese ban of mining they announced back in 2019 is certainly the biggest thing that happened in 2021 because it will finally break the myth that China controls BTC - and finally there will be (hopefully) more decentralization when it comes to BTC mining.

What’s weird about the whole story is that this whole situation actually shows that Chinese miners have actually used mostly renewable energy, and if I’m not mistaken such green energy sources don’t exist anywhere in the world given that of the top 10 such dams as many as 5 are located in China, while a third of all large hydropower plants are also located in China.

List of largest hydroelectric power stations

Bitcoin mining council reported a very interesting presentation on how China Ban Impacted mining industry, accelerating the transition toward more sustainable energy sources:

Global Bitcoin Mining Data Review Q2 2021



China Banc is one of the more important events in the mining industry since inception, I qould say. This will determine future scenarios for the industry: in a few months, the time necessary for bigger miners to reallocate all their hash power, we will have a clearer picture of the new situation. I guess we will have less renewable than today, but definitely more than the initial status.

Bitcoin is the most ESG-compliant industry in the world:




https://twitter.com/documentingbtc/status/1410947786502180875?s=21

How to answer to a challenging journalist:


https://twitter.com/jasonles_/status/1403453709896478721?s=21

I didn't mean like a personal attack or something, god no!
More like here, you go, fresh material, let's dissect this one!


I felt like you're reminding me of it because we had a discussion about it in the past on this topic, that's why and nothing more. Sometimes I really hate when I use the worse of the worse wording for something, and like in Murphy's laws, guess what, I only do with people with whom I always had nice conversations around here.

Sorry, it wasn't meant to be targeted at you. I am not yet obsessed with personal opinion to sneakily reference anyone in my pots.
And, even if we don't agree, I think you explained your ideas very clearly and logically.

 

I don't know if this one is targeted at me but no, geothermal or coal or wind I won't ever agree with that theory of bitcoin mining acting as a battery.
That theory is so far-fetched that even me filling my car with gas I'm becoming a battery! A battery works by taking energy when you have a surplus or at least available energy and deploying when you have none, and mining will never act like this, mining is a 24/7 action that drains power even at peak consumption hours.

And I already know the rebuttal, but we have energy that can be harvested in places we can't build anything other than bitcoin mining farms.
Well, ever thought of not investing all that money in producing energy in places when you don't have a need for it?
Nobody is building solar panels in the Ténéré and demands people to consume it!

The bottom line, no, that is pure propaganda material, and one more thing:


Tell this to any miner and he will walk away laughing!
In a race where you have to ROI as fast as you can and hopefully while your gear is still in warranty so you don't end with a burned hashboard before you managed to get at least your investment back, turning on and off miners is just silly..


Sums everything up!

In a previous post, I wrote that geothermal plants cannot be placed everywhere.

This argument works also in the opposite directions: often geothermal plants are in remote regions, where electricity would need bit infrastructures to be moved where it actually is needed. And often those infrastructures are costly to build and maintain.
So, often these resources are simply ignored and not used.

El Salvador plans bitcoin mining using geothermal energy



Well, bitcoin mining easily can change that.
Bitcoin as a battery, do you remember?

Yeah, geothermal has a rather limited area, but all types do to an extent, there are areas where solar is just useless, and efficiency on average of 3hours per day like the one in Germany causes more problems than it solves and it works only because of the government pumping more and more money into it. And despite all this eco-friendly trend, Germany has the highest electric costs in the world per kWh. Indeed some countries don't have an acre of land where this would be feasible but there are a lot of areas where there is not a single plant, like all of Canada! And others could build a lot more, like, well...Italy  , it's not like we're going to solve the problem of the world with it alone but it's cheaper and far more reliable, running 24/7 and a perfect grid balancer.

I know pretty well that no matter how much drilling is done in Salvador they can draw a maximum of 600-900 MW and that will not be able to feed even 10% of all the miners but it's a start in the good direction, mining with solar and wind is a fairytale, and if we cut pollution when there are only 3 options left, nuclear, geothermal, and hydro.

Now that I think, this whole Salvador thing is starting to look too good to be true 

I guess the only, big, problem with geothermal is that you cannot decide where to put such plants, but it's linked to your territory. So while some countries are full of geothermal activity and energy, some others might be struggling with this form of energy.

When I read the news about mining I was praying, please god, please don't let it be solar!!!
But geothermal, yeah, that's one of the few actual solutions for really clean uninterrupted no extra cost mining, not wind and solar that might leave you in the dark for days.

Of course, it's not like they've started digging that well a few days ago and now it's ready to produce energy, it's an older project and the whole powerplant will have 90MW, but the guy deserves it, he really grabbed us out of the bear den, one more week like the last ones and I was going to put bids in the 20k range. Now, all we need is for all of the western US and Canada to understand that geothermal is one hundred times better than playing with solar panels, and a lot more problems, not just bitcoin consumption will be solved.

From the "El Salvador's Authoritarian Hipster" a lesson on mining: mining with fossil fuels is only a historical accident. Future is mining with full renewable-clean energy:


https://twitter.com/nayibbukele/status/1402680890057166858?s=21


Qualcosa sembra già muoversi:

https://twitter.com/nayibbukele/status/1402714926800674827?s=21

State owned-clean mining: this is a game-changer.

I don't agree with the view that bitcoin is an environmental disaster. Although mining will consume a lot of resources, the total amount of bitcoin issued is certain. Once this value is reached, there will be no loss like ordinary currency. There is no need to print again, and the printing resources will no longer be consumed. So bitcoin is protecting the environment.

so like if the hash rate was at ~165exa in february 2021 using s19 at 3.25kw for 90thash
and like if the hashrate was at ~165exa in may 2021 using s19pro at 3.25kw for 110tash

well thats then not needing to run as many asic mining machines to achieve the same hashrate
thus less electricity used from the grid.

id call that more then a 10% drop in electric need.

so.. um.. let me just say it
your target goal has been achieved

It’s a coordinated FUD attack involving the Vatican too!



I find it ironic the Church vowing against PoW. They should be the first sponsor of the POW!

Actually, if I think better at this, uh, they might like PoS...
/j

- If you talk about farm projects in the past, bitcoin mining may not have too much impact on the environment but modern life is showing how big income is through these farms, mining equipment is also being optimized to improve mining problems. And more power consumption is inevitable in bitcoin mining, a few farms may not be affected but this is a chain of farms with a global network, emissions are increasing rapidly and it seems to affect the environment and climate, there is quite a bit of doubt that bitcoin will be one of the major causes of environmental harm in the near future.

I'm sure mining farms cannot afford to leave any working ASICs undeployed. CBECI's estimation is as good as an educated guess and that is all we can work with.

There are far too many factors that can (and will) affect the electrical usage of Bitcoin. Any noticeable decrease in energy consumption of Bitcoin is NOT enough; environmentalist are not happy with high perceived electrical usage in the first place. There is no reason why they would be content with say 30% decrease in electrical usage. When it gets to something that they're content with, Bitcoin isn't secure any more. Arguably, constantly phasing out and replacing ASICs will have significant environmental impact as well. It is not a one-dimension issue as media perceives it to be.

Economic-wise, the electrical consumption will probably not change and remain at a certain equilibrium.