Topic: Tax on mining due to climate change. (Read 1676 times)

i laugh at anyone that thinks that bitcoins will ruin the environment.

take las vegas for instance. each light bulb to be as dazzling as they are would be atleast 100watts. now count up the millions of light bulbs per casino, just for their decorative display outside. then add on the electric for the heating and all the casino game/slot machines. and i havnt even got to the electric usage of the hotel part of las vegas ( air-con, room lighting, TV/entertainment centre)

so lets just put the hotels into numbers. (ignoring decorative casino's and residential houses)
aircon+TV+lighting per hotel room average 1kwatt multiply by 500 rooms = 500kwatt
now thats the equivalent to 1000 ant miners (180thash)

now multiply that by the amount of hotel's (122) on the strip.
so lets average 100 locations of the size mentioned above. which totals 18,000 Thash
you will find that las vegas's hotels alone out powers the electrical cost of bitcoin, and their choice of currency is poker chips

now lets look at new yorks electric bill for all of its buildings on wall street... (leaving you to ponder the electricity wastage of the dollar market)


*note: some hotels have 10 rooms with an adjacent micro-casino, some have well over 1000 rooms so i averaged out to low numbers, las vegas is more electricity wasted then my maths has shown

Taxes are only entities of governments.

Bitcoin will solve that.

As far as I know, Bitcoin mining uses a relatively modest amount of electricity, especially with new ASICS. It's not as if Visa and PayPal don't use electricity, they have to run a ton of servers.

We don't need ANY more taxes. There are too many already.

Tax like Carbon tax???  What's it gonna call? Mining Tax? 

There is a solution to the electricity use of crypto miners, it's called Peercoin

Mined coins will not survive.
Or should I say the wasteful proof-of-work algorithms will not survive.

I don't think we will have to worry about a climate change tax...

interesting topic.

Thanks for the hint!  ;-)

mined coins will be gone within 2 years so the point is moot... except for perhaps bitcoin...

yes bee7, i was cynical.

I doubt. The hash power growth should stop when any new investment into it does not make profit.

SolarCoin.org

Well, if the bitcoins is here to stay....the exponential growth (GH/s) will ultimately be 20.000MW in the year 2017 allready.  https://blockchain.info/nl/charts/hash-rate

Good luck bitcoin! If we keep believing it will happen indeed!

I think you over estimate how large the bitcion market is (or will be in the near future) compared to the butt load of energy used to maintain massive server farms in support of the existing fiat currency economy. Saying that climate tax would spoil the bicoin market is about as true as saying that it will cause ATMs to be shuttered and hauled off the the recycle plants. Any tax on energy is going to affect far more commerce than bitcoin could even hope to impact. Imagine just the energy used in refrigeration, do you think grocery stores will suddenly stop selling ice cream and frozen dinners? Will butchers suddenly throw their hands up and go find other jobs?

The fact is that electricity companies have a captive market and they use that to their advantage (at least in the US). That's why states are paying millions to electricity generation companies to cover their costs to move from coal to LNG. Even though the move to gas will save those companies money because their coal contracts are running out, the legislators are more than happy to cry "oh, 200 jobs!, we MUST give them the 30 million to convert!". Those companies are booking record profits, but can't afford to do their own upgrades?  Not in the least, why pay for your own company when you're bought-and-paid-for politician will hand you the money from the taxpayer's wallet.

Replace banks with miners, which, as of right now, waste *far* more energy... and they still require construction, specialized to boot, and cooling.

You won't need to grow cotton any more, but you'll need to grow silica, and even more precious materials, to keep making/shrinking miner hardware.

Instead of fighting wars for this "Pretro-dollar" you get to fight war for the most efficent mining hardware. Watch out for armed para=troopers falling through your roof. Whichever country controls more of the network, yo.

This is stupid delusion.


update to my post cited above: the ATMIA withdraw the page I linked to. Here is some replacement: https://www.atmia.com/news/?detail&id=154
The present network power is 19,303,048.14 GH/s according to blockchain.info. Assuming that modern mining equipment draws 1W per Gh the whole bitcoin network consumes 463.27315536 MW a day.

Higher cost of energy will only reduce volume of mining a bit. No effect on the price of bitcoin.

Well,  If the Panda or the IceBear get into trouble
and the bees have problems to reproduce
and the farmers can not grow their crops
and the volume of ice has dropped by 90% since 1970 (not the area, this only 40%).
etc.
etc.
etc.

its not a joke!

No, only those built/bought by miners.
If you don't like windmills you can always settle near a river and get something like that:

Since we are playing "what if Bitcoin becomes big enough that it will affect the global power grid".

What if it replaces most banks and we no longer have to spend energy to run those banks? (Lights, heating, cooling, construction, security, employees, transportation, checks, debit cards, etc.)

What if it replaces most fiat and we no longer need to grow and harvest cotton to print the bills? (Harvesting, production, storage, transportation, security, etc.)

What if we no longer have to fight wars to protect the interests of the petro-dollar? (Ships, aircraft, weapons, training, training facilities, bases, etc,)

Which future looks more environmentally friendly to you?

"What if" is fun!