• Immersive_Matthew@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    10 months ago

    It is the cost of securing the network. It is intentional as if it was low power and easy to mine, 1 person or organization could take over the network and thus it would loose its decentralization. Nothing wrong with using power as long as it is green. No one is complaining about how much energy social media uses, or electric cars, or the fiat banking systems or all the lights left on etc etc. Power usage is not the issue here, it is power generation. You best believe that big money is spinning Bitcoin as negative as possible as it is a threat to their establishment. Don’t be a sucker for the BS.

    • assassinatedbyCIA@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      It still a problem if it’s using green power as it’s preventing that green power from replacing fossil fuels in more useful and essential parts of the economy. Therefore essentially increasing demand for fossil fuels. Additionally by increasing the nations total energy use it’s making the task of decarbonising energy just that little bit harder.

      • makeasnek@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        The problem with green energy is that it produces on its own schedule, divorced of when people actually want electricity. Bitcoin miners are “buyers of last resort”. They have to compete with every other miner on the planet, they don’t buy electric at peak usage hours (which is when you fire up the non-renewables to meet demand). If anybody else was there to buy that electricity, Bitcoin miners don’t. They can only afford the cheapest electricity and electricity which has nowhere else to go.

        Bitcoin mining is part of the green revolution. By always having a buyer of last resort, it makes it easier to invest in renewable infrastructure knowing that somebody will always buy the power even if demand isn’t ordinarily there to meet supply. It allows you to build your grid out to be almost entirely renewables. It’s a form of energy storage. And it means when regular people buy power, it’s cheaper, because they don’t have to make up for that time period when electricity was being produced but there was nobody to buy it. Regular people don’t have to subsidize the cost of a solar panel farm that is only useful for a few hours a day when demand is at the peak and otherwise produces energy there is no use for.

      • Immersive_Matthew@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        10 months ago

        Energy use is going up with or without crypto. It is a solvable problem. We just have to have the will. The focus should be on more green power, not restricting those who use it already.

        • assassinatedbyCIA@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yeah, but the problem is that the green energy could have gone to powering a hospital or a factory, something actually useful. But instead it’s going to crypto. The hospital and the factory still need power and they are likely to pull it from a fossil fuel source. Essentially ’green’ crypto mining is creating demand for fossil fuels making it not actually green. Also we don’t have the time for our energy transition to be slowed down by crypto. Especially considering how utterly useless it is.

          • Immersive_Matthew@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            10 months ago

            You can make this argument with anything that demands electricity. This is how we generate full stop. Anything else is a distraction that propaganda has placed in your mind.