Topic: US wants to know bitcoin electricity usage in the country (Read 363 times)

As Matthew Kratter often points out more electrical energy is expended by people watching cat videos or viewing online porn then is consumed from bitcoin mining.

Will the Biden administration do a survey of how much time people spend watching porn and cat videos?

Are the tens of millions of hours people spend  watching internet porn every day somehow less harmful to the environment then using the internet to send and receive bitcoin?

Would it help the environment if President Biden stopped flying around in Air Force One?

What kind of energy usage isn't harmful to the environment? Does it even exist? Why not just outlaw all energy usage so we can all go back to living in prehistoric caveman times?

You can sure count on it!

2024 presents...
USA & The War On Bitcoin

Just like the war on drugs, where the US seized, manufactured and redistributed drugs for profit...the US will seize miners, manufacture bitcoin through those seized miners and then redistribute those bitcoins for profit!

If they find enough hashpower to seize (or tax) they will probably hit the reset button on their holdings, sell it all off on-market, wipe out as many miners as possible to make mining as non-profitable as possible, and take over close-to the entire US mining operation.

Any of the above should not be surprising, the US cartel has been doing this kind of shady shit for decades!

Let me guess, they're gonna pull another green initiative crap to justify their possible crackdown on miners. They're trying to curb whatever growth bitcoin has had in the past few months ever since the ETFs have been approved. I doubt they have pure intentions with this survey, and I do hope that miners do not give actual numbers to make data collectors lose their head.

so much to unpick and correct in all statements quoted above
a. stompix using 100000exa number.... yet reality is only <600exa for full WORLD network, let alone just the american mining which is far less
b. stompix "because a miner gulps out all" a miner only uses <4KWh
i feel stompix's real fear is his out-of-date single asic he rented through a remote host will be seized by gov before he makes ROI

Gormicsta:
most significant asic farms (unlike stompixes favourite legally iffy and fossil powered hosts) already positioned themselves in regions where renewable power plants want mining business. and contracted electrical sales for 1-2year contract allotments of energy, fully knowing of the generation vs consumption demand/supply

what actually happens in a region is..
decades before a region can even build real estate, it needs power capacity. and so if a new renewable power plant is placed in the region. its done with considerations of FUTURE demand(forward planning supply needs, 50 years ahead of demand). thus has alot of excess supply potential in first few decades before real estate can develop to take that supply.
so power plants LOVE quick established demand as its early income before the long wait of real estate development to take on the new supply

We know the negative impact of bitcoin mining to the environment (particular POW mining), but what if this action by the Biden administration is not genuinely about much interest for the environment but using the environmental impact aspect of it as a facade to clamp on bitcoin miners with policies that could make bitcoin mining a thing of the past for many US miners after the survey would have been concluded.

Never trust the government they are always up to something, particular on anything that seems to threaten their hold on financial and political power on the people. I think this survey shouldn't only stop at bitcoin miners activities but extension to other human activities in the society with negative impacts on the environment. Maybe then we can assume that ain't really up to something towards bitcoin alone.

Not only is the quantity of energy used in proof-of-work mining troubling, but so is the energy source. Fossil fuel consumption by miners has the potential to exacerbate environmental issues such as global warming. That's far less of an issue, though, if miners are employing renewable energy sources. However, this does not mean that miners' operations aren't negatively affecting the surrounding community, even if they are employing renewable energy. When considering the environmental impacts of proof-of-work mining, that is something that should definitely be taken into account.

This is what we get when politicians make rules about things they do not understand at all, mining is a very useful way to stabilize an electrical network, and becomes a "buyer of last resort" which allow some energy projects to actually be feasible.

They will realize in a few years, or maybe not.... but bitcoin is that unstoppable behemoth that will not be stopped by proposal like these ones. Worst case scenario, miners will move out, as they did during the china ban.

Whatever it is they want to do with such data, I have a feeling that it will not be to the good of Bitcoin and the Bitcoin community. I do not see how such data is supposed to be important to the US government because the electricity are paid for by the mining companies. Assuming the energy consumption of the mining rigs poses a threat in any form, then it would have been open for discussion. Like you said, we can only hope they are not planning another crackdown on Bitcoin mining activities in the US and by extension, the rest of the world.

What else can you expect? If they are doing a survey or some investigation or whatever regarding Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, you should know that they are thinking about doing something which is why they need such data so that they can come up with an excuse or something to do something against Bitcoin and the miners within their region.

They consider Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies to be a hurdle in their way of controlling people and their finances because if they leave them alone, don't do anything, and let the people adopt and use Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies freely, they know people will start managing their finances and financial activities themselves instead of having a requirement of a central party to do that and that would mean no control and power for the authorities at all.

That's certainly because electricity is not unlimited, you need to built plants and infrastructures in order to generate it and to deliver it. And mining Bitcoin doesn't bring much things to the US unfortunately, it doesn't create jobs or a real economy there. Miners only use american electricity to make money on international crypto exchanges without buying and selling anything in the country except electricity, so if it induces any net cost to the US, they will certainly tax crypto ming or ban it there.

texas ERCOT grid is only 23% fossil 77% renewable/nuclear
there are many many asic farms in texas using the grid, signing electric contracts for large MW allotments due to texas ERCOT being more green than your preferred host

If they cannot help the situation then they shouldn't by any means add to the challenges the bitcoin mining may face, if they got to know more about this, how will they help, I hope this will not also lead to what we are thinking when they will come up with the threat on high demands on energy consumption for bitcoin mining, my feelings though, I expect by now they should have realized that none of these is environmentally unfriendly with the emissions through the energy required compared to the ones they the government render to the environment through their centralized energy consumptionw on other economic activities.

i don't know why the government keeps raising news about energy use in the crypto industry, do they think that energy use in the crypto industry is much higher compared to other industries? even though the crypto industry also contributes taxes and pays electricity to the country, why is this industry continuously monitored closely as something disturbing by the government. this is unfair and discriminatory against bitcoin..

Monitoring electricity usage of Bitcoin mining isn't necessarily a bad thing. Having data like that can help make informed decisions about potential regulations. But that's only if they're being open-minded and if the point isn't to just confirm that mining has a negative impact and should be restricted.
I believe that what they should be looking at is not just electricity usage, but also electricity sources, for example. Also, they should look at other areas with high electricity consumption and analyse their positive and negative impact alongside that of the mining industry.

And I asked you where!


And I asked you which!


It's getting tired of empty statements without proof.

I showed you 3GW of fossil fuel powerplant completely OWNED by mining companies, you have failed to produce at least one example of medium one running exclusively on solar and wind. Why don't you go one by one, all of the major mining companies in the US are listed on the stock exchange they have to provide data on their operation, their assets and so on, so why do I have the press release of HUT8 buying 4 gas powered plants in Canada and not a single one about buying a solar farm?

You want to debunk the FUD, good, do that with facts and numbers! So, show me the panels!


And this is exactly what EIA is going to do, they are going to get the data and from now it's the government going to penalize miners that consume fossil generated energy and make them use renewables. Nobody will give a damn if 100000Exahas are powered by the miners own renewables, but if you're increasing community electricity prices because a miner gulps out all the electricity from a dam, that's not going to fly


Franky, what's the hash rate of those crap coins? Is it enough to counter 500 exahash of old gear you supposedly thrown out to replace to get your efficiency?
And for god's sake learn to use quote!

YOU are the idiot that mentions sha256 miners sold to altcoin using scrypt.. no one else.. just you
what a stupid response you made and then debunked yourself instantly..

when crapcoin of sha256, have users that cant afford to buy s19/s21 new asics at $4k+ for 200thash, which affects profitability.. they instead buy older gen asics cheap, thus the hardware saving counters the inefficiency of the asics electric:hashrate conversion rate

another common sense analogy for you
when your parents cant afford to buy you new clothes. they bought second hand hand-you-down clothes to save on the overall fashion bill of the family

.. wait.. is this why you still use a s17 on a hosted plan..
(cant afford to buy a newer gen asic and cant afford to mine in the EU so you signed up to a US hosting plan you now idolise, even if it hasnt made you ROI a couple years later.. and now you are worried the EPA will shut down your host and confiscate your asic)

Did you not read what I wrote? I talked about miners running AT renewable power plants. THIS ALREADY EXISTS. Government should just be promoting it rather than trying to demonize bitcoin mining for power use, which is very arbitrary since everything these days uses power. There are also mining companies  building or who have built their own renewable power plants specifically for running their mining operations. You act like mining with renewables doesn't exist lol, when renewables have been heavily used in mining for many years.

You didn't really make a good point when you pointed to a coal plant that was so cheap because it was literally operating illegally lol. Of course that's going to be cheap, they also had to shut it down because it wasn't legal so you lost that argument right there.

Why isn't anyone mining at home with solar panels?? I'm sure there are lots of people using solar panels to cover some of their mining electricity usage. I'd be interested to know why you assume their aren't? Think its pretty obvious a lot of people do that.

And why are you trying to put words into my mouth? I said nothing about hurting people to benefit miners. Literally I said the opposite. That mining should be done in a way that is BENEFICIAL to society. You're pretending I said I want mining to hurt society. You know you're losing the argument stompix when every reply you're just arguing against things I didn't say, rather than arguing against the things I did say. Your last sentence absolutely applies to people who disregard any bad effect of mining on society or miners who operate on the grid at the same level of consumers and jack up the price of electricity, but I in no way said I support any of that. You're just making stuff up because I didn't give you something to argue with me about, at least not an argument you could win, clearly.


It's pretty simple. Government should try to nudge mining companies to choose renewables over fossil fuels. Much of mining already uses renewables, and the goal is just to gradually move that higher and higher (it is already high, certainly higher than the US as a whole uses renewables). Government should be actively promoting miners to operate at all renewable power plants. Government should be promoting the benefits of bitcoin mining on society (outside of the benefits of course bitcoin mining has directly for bitcoin) and there are big benefits! Whatever incentives/disincentives the govt comes up with to nudge miners to use even more renewables should be sensible and reasonable, and obviously not simply be an attack on miners. For example, some large and arbitrary tax on all miners with the goal to simply put them out of business....that is no sensible or reasonable and does nothing to increase the benefits of mining while stopping the "misuse" of mining.

Well,  show me one mine major mine that uses only solar and wind and doesn't fall back on the grid at night or when there is no wind! Or at least one major farm, so let's say 100MW that is powered with solar panels! I can show you dozens of this running 100% on coal and gas.

And it's not because well they hate the environment or something lese, it's because it's cheaper!!!!
Mara was paying at Harding 2.4 cents per kwh before they had to shut it down since the plant was following any environment rules, a 7 years mothballed plant running on coal.
You CAN'T compete with that!

The only way you can do is having small partnerships like Phil here does, when you feed power in the system, you have extra capacity, you get power from the grid at night and so on. But on a scale of Rocksdale at 750 MW, well...show me the panels!

If renewables would have been cheaper, why isn't anyone mining at home with their solar panels? Crickets!


So how do you plan on telling the average Joe paying 15 cents/kwh that the government needs to subsidize miners to pay only 4 cents per kwh to keep them competitive while at the same time Joe has to cut electricity consumption and gas consumption and face blackouts while miners asks for permits to burn tiers to produce electricity?

This is the problem when you're so heavily involved in something, like people here are in bitcoin, you stop seeing the worlds from the others' point of view!



Oh yeah, resold to....what?  

S17 and S9 are sold to...mine the stuff that....uses scrypt? Yeah, almost forgot that's what ASICs are, Multi Purpose Integrated Circuit devices
Or they are used to mine bsv, since obviously it's profitable to do so with it since the guys mining BCH and BSV are too stupid to buy a new miner!
Oh btw, what's the hashrate of BSV and BCH combined?

But nevermind that, how much do you get a day by mining Ripple with an s17? 

its resold to the altcoin market.. (you really need to check on things before posting.. )
oh and you 30,000tonnes number.. i laugh
30,000tonnes is YOU suggesting 2.1million asics are thrown away every year

heck your not just 2x exaggerating numbers without thinking. you are multiplying an exaggeration by alot more then 2x



i dont idolise nor care about riot. you seem too involved, too idolising of riot. i dont care about riot but know i can actually find information. unlike you that admit you dont use google and instead presumably been provided with links to things that confirmation bias fit your narrative.

maybe try to look passed your favoured bookmarks


they dont just spike and drop, i cant believe i even have to explain how factories CONTINUALLY quality assure there products. where each electrical outlet would have a device connected to it and swapped out with the next batch meaning the production rate is continually cycled as is the quality assurance tested products cycled before shipping.. no drop off.. just a change of which serial number product is currently running.. which wont be noticeable to the hashrate when they cycle through batches

okay first off

s17 pro set to low or using brains does around 29 watts a th 35 watts a th on medium

s19 pro does about 29 watts

s19 xp does about 23 watts

all of the above I own and they are well tested numbers

so I don’t own a s21 but there was some testing done here showing

3900 watts and 200 th which is 19.5 watts not the advertised 17.5

based on jan 2023 13 months ago we had around 400 eh and no s21s

we are now at 550eh

lets argue 75 eh are s21s and based on current testing lets argue 19 watts

the other 500eh are maybe 28watts certainly not more 32 watts or more

so maybe the  numbers are
 400eh at 33 watts and
 75 eh at 26 watts and
 75 eh at 19 watts

I am on an ipad mini so I need to check the average for those numbers.


I am thinking ballpark the network is close to 30 watts not lower .