Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Monday May 21 2018, @02:12PM   Printer-friendly
from the how-many-DeLoreans? dept.

According to a press release carried by Eurekalert

In the first rigorously peer-reviewed article quantifying Bitcoin's energy requirements, a Commentary appearing May 16 in the journal Joule, financial economist and blockchain specialist Alex de Vries uses a new methodology to pinpoint where Bitcoin's electric energy consumption is headed and how soon it might get there.

The abstract of the article says

The Bitcoin network can be estimated to consume at least 2.55 gigawatts of electricity currently, and potentially 7.67 gigawatts in the future, making it comparable with countries such as Ireland (3.1 gigawatts) and Austria (8.2 gigawatts). [...]

The author offers a caveat:

[...] all of the methods discussed assume rational agents. There may be various reasons for an agent to mine even when this isn't profitable, and in some cases costs may not play a role at all when machines and/or electricity are stolen or abused.

[Other] reasons for an agent to mine Bitcoin at a loss might include [...] being able to obtain Bitcoin completely anonymously, libertarian ideology [...] or speculative reasons.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 22 2018, @12:23AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 22 2018, @12:23AM (#682471)

    I am a proponent of free markets, and think generally speaking they are the least-inefficient way of allocating resources currently known to humanity. "Generally" being a key term in the previous sentence, as in specific situations there are better ways. That being said...

    This is pretty clearly a good example of why everybody who says that the "invisible hand of the market will solve any problem" is not correct. Bitcoin mining is clearly broken. Case-in-point, if suddenly the number of bitcoin miners were to drop to 10%, the overall system would be identical to it is now (read: provide as much value) but only use 10% of the electricity. Moreover, by any real measure (food grown, beds warmed, clothes made, lives saved, cars manufactured, etc), the productivity of the country of Ireland is more valuable than the market for bitcoins.

    No, I don't think this needs to be "fixed." It does demonstrate why "the free market" doesn't solve everything, though.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 22 2018, @01:26AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 22 2018, @01:26AM (#682489)

    Bitcoin mining is clearly broken. Case-in-point, if suddenly the number of bitcoin miners were to drop to 10%, the overall system would be identical to it is now (read: provide as much value) but only use 10% of the electricity.

    It doesn't seem that you understand the most basic stuff about cryptos. Really, you just have to use them to understand what they are (I don't mean just have a coinbase account).

    the productivity of the country of Ireland is more valuable than the market for bitcoins.

    Lots strange about this. First, who said it wasn't? Are you equating electricity consumption with productivity of a country? Anyway, different people may value different things. Do you think the productivity of Ireland is more important than your access to porn?