Is anyone else starting to become a bit worried? mod note in first post

listermint wrote: »

No offence but where did you make this up. Waste energy is it ..

This is good btw. Gold.

Waste in the sense that nonbody else will realistically buy it. I think once you go over a couple hundred miles the economics of it aren’t attractive enough to justify the transmission compromises/cost. Also, it is enormously difficult to develop/permit transmission lines. That's why you don't see HV lines run very far.

So these mining farms on the edges of deserts and whatnot are at least giving the generators some business.

Listen, I agree that it would be better for all if they could somehow transition BTC to some kind of proof of stake. If that's even possible, I don't know. And for the record I have never owned any BTC. But it is not the earth killer that many make it out to be.

If you really want to get eco angry then go yell at the aircraft and shipping people or something. We've had enough broken records complaining about energy already.

listermint

Rob2D wrote: »

Waste in the sense that nonbody else will realistically buy it. I think once you go over a couple hundred miles the economics of it aren’t attractive enough to justify the transmission compromises/cost. Also, it is enormously difficult to develop/permit transmission lines. That's why you don't see HV lines run very far.

So these mining farms on the edges of deserts and whatnot are at least giving the generators some business.

Listen, I agree that it would be better for all if they could somehow transition BTC to some kind of proof of stake. If that's even possible, I don't know. And for the record I have never owned any BTC. But it is not the earth killer that many make it out to be.

If you really want to get eco angry then go yell at the aircraft and shipping people or something. We've had enough broken records complaining about energy already.

If they werent there then the energy wouldn't need to be transmitted. It doesnt waste you just close the source . E.g coal burning or gas station.

I'm not eco warrior at all .
But claiming aircraft that literally fly people and goods to destinations is equivalent to a speculative subjective asset is a bit.... Fetched tbf.

listermint wrote: »

If they werent there then the energy wouldn't need to be transmitted. It doesnt waste you just close the source . E.g coal burning or gas station.

I'm not eco warrior at all .
But claiming aircraft that literally fly people and goods to destinations is equivalent to a speculative subjective asset is a bit.... Fetched tbf.

I'm just using two very dirty business that really can be cleaned up as an example (and I know becuase I worked in aviation for years). And lets not even get into the mess that is ships.

Whereas BTC already does a very good job at being efficient as it can and will only get better.

Luckycharms_74

This is how leverage trading can cripple you

https://u.today/more-than-755000-crypto-traders-liquidated-in-one-day

Rob2D wrote: »

Waste in the sense that nonbody else will realistically buy it. I think once you go over a couple hundred miles the economics of it aren’t attractive enough to justify the transmission compromises/cost. Also, it is enormously difficult to develop/permit transmission lines. That's why you don't see HV lines run very far.

So these mining farms on the edges of deserts and whatnot are at least giving the generators some business.

True. And also there is the case of renewables, for which you can't control how much they are producing as it depends on weather conditions. There are situations whereby the grid is producing more that total demand and there is no way to reduce that production. This oversupply has to be sold at a very cheap price which is obviously attractive for crypto miners.

Rob2D wrote: »

Listen, I agree that it would be better for all if they could somehow transition BTC to some kind of proof of stake. If that's even possible, I don't know. And for the record I have never owned any BTC. But it is not the earth killer that many make it out to be.

No sure I agree here. POS makes different compromises in terms of security and consensus mechanisms and introduces new attack vectors. I think there is room for both depending on the use case. I rather like BTC as the "dumb" and simple attempt to create digital gold it has became (I know this was not necessarily the original intend). Obviously with POW it can't scale to become a global payment system, but personally I don't care and I am happy with it as a base layer trusted asset. Ethereum 2.0 will be the first large scale deployment of POS, we'll see how works out.

seannash

listermint wrote: »

If they werent there then the energy wouldn't need to be transmitted. It doesnt waste you just close the source . E.g coal burning or gas station.

I'm not eco warrior at all .
But claiming aircraft that literally fly people and goods to destinations is equivalent to a speculative subjective asset is a bit.... Fetched tbf.

If you bothered to read the article you would have found your answer about wasted energy

"Hydro is the most well-known example of this. In the wet season in Sichuan and Yunnan, enormous quantities of renewable hydro energy are wasted every year. In these areas, production capacity massively outpaces local demand, and battery technology is far from advanced enough to make it worthwhile to store and transport energy from these rural regions into the urban centers that need it. These regions most likely represent the single largest stranded energy resource on the planet, and as such it’s no coincidence that these provinces are the heartlands of mining in China, responsible for almost 10% of global Bitcoin mining in the dry season and 50% in the wet season"

seannash wrote: »

70% from renewable energy... not sure why you think this is so damning.
Take a look at how much energy christmas lights in the US use up.

https://phys.org/news/2015-12-christmas-energy-entire-countries.html

Robbing Peter to pay Paul, that's clean power that is diverted from elsewhere. And for what benefit? For who?

Climate change and carbon emissions are a global priority and it's going to have an impact on bitcoin. It's not providing enough of a service to justify its impact.

The only supporters are those holding bitcoin as they are concerned with their investments, what proportion of the population are they and what is the rest of the worlds opinion? That's what matters, not the opinion of those with diamond hands.

Bob24 wrote: »

True. And also there is the case of renewables, for which you can't control how much they are producing as it depends on weather conditions. There are situations whereby the grid is producing more that total demand and there is no way to reduce that production. This oversupply has to be sold at a very cheap price which is obviously attractive for crypto miners.

Iceland is a good example of this. Given their geothermal energy output, many mining operations set up in Iceland to use geothermal energy which otherwise would have flowed into the ocean.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Robbing Peter to pay Paul, that's clean power that is diverted from elsewhere. And for what benefit? For who?

Actually as mentioned in previous posts there is a lot of renewable electricity being wasted.

The narrative aiming for 100% renewable is a bit of a fallacy (particularly related to wind and solar, hydro is better as it has a fairly constant and predictable output).

Since you can’t control when and how much you are producing renewable electricity, you can’t closely match production with demand as would be done with fossil fuels. This leads to situations of oversupply as in effect countries with a large proportion of renewables have to install a much larger total production capacity than their actual consumption (including fossil fuel backups). They are doing this to make sure they can face unfavourable weather conditions (or simply night time) whereby renewables aren’t running at full capacity (or at all) but demand is still there. It means that when weather conditions are favourable and consumption isn’t at its peak, their grid can be producing *a lot* more than the country needs and they are dumping that excess electricity at a cheap price which is perfect for crypto miners.

All this doesn't mean the crypto industry shouldn't be mindful of its carbon footprint, but it also needs to defend itself against questionable narratives.

PS: because of the above, get ready for the same environmental activists who have been arguing against nuclear energy to completely change their tune and start cheering for it in the coming months and years (this has slowly started already). This is because they will have to acknowledge that it is the only carbon-free and large scale energy source we currently have to provide base load power to a grid when renewables are not running (especially taking into account that pressure on the grid will increase massively as petrol cars are being replaced by electric cars which need to be charged).

CorkRed93 wrote: »

This has widely been debunked

I stand corrected then.

There are full blown datacentres setup to mine Bitcoin. It's a huge business and the idea that Bitcoin will go to zero anytime soon is rediculous. Just look at how many institutional investors have added crypto to their portfolio's.
The crypto market will evolve over time as it's real world use is further developed. In the meantime altcoins will grow and then many of them will die a death unless they are game changers or have a niche type of usability.

Last night I decided to do a bit of crypto shopping. When/if there is a further dip, I will do some more shopping. I don't care if my investment keeps dropping as it would need to drop another 60% for me to start making a loss. Ultimately it's going to soar again, whether that's this year or in 3 years.

Dohnjoe

Deleted User wrote: »

There are full blown datacentres setup to mine Bitcoin. It's a huge business and the idea that Bitcoin will go to zero anytime soon is rediculous. Just look at how many institutional investors have added crypto to their portfolio's.
The crypto market will evolve over time as it's real world use is further developed. In the meantime altcoins will grow and then many of them will die a death unless they are game changers or have a niche type of usability.

Last night I decided to do a bit of crypto shopping. When/if there is a further dip, I will do some more shopping. I don't care if my investment keeps dropping as it would need to drop another 60% for me to start making a loss. Ultimately it's going to soar again, whether that's this year or in 3 years.

*opinion

It might soar, or it might not, no one knows for sure. Global regulation, anything could happen. This "it will only ever go up" mentality that people have is borderline dogmatic.

I've had BTC for a long time, in my opinion it's pretty useless stuff, it's basically just a speculation token that doesn't produce anything. At best it's an "out of the system" hedge. As for the market, it's almost purely for speculation, there is little or no reason why any of that stuff is there other than for people to try and out-gamble each other. Each passing year this is more and more evident. DeFi and BC related tech is cool, but it's easy enough to replicate if there's an actual need.

el diablo

Sweetest Perfection wrote: »

Coinbase is only allowing me to spend a measly $3,000. So where can I buy a one full bitcoin in one transaction?

Kraken.

CorkRed93 wrote: »

This has widely been debunked

Debunked by who? Links please.

el diablo wrote: »

Debunked by who? Links please.

Good question. I’ve seen multiple reports going from 40% to 75% but obviously all of this is guesswork and I wouldn’t say any of those is “debunking” another. They are just estimating thing differently.

Sweetest Perfection

Aren't we already 3 times past the point of no return with climate change? We're already doomed according to climate scientists, so going to zero carbon emissions worldwide tomorrow would do feck all unless we stay at zero for an unknown period of time. How would we do that?
Sending industry to India and China and introducing carbon taxes in the West is pure snake oil.
Also, how do we know climate change is bad in the long-long term? We don't.
I'll keep investing in crypto, thanks.

Mucashinto

BTC either nukes 10k or jumps 10k in the next few days surely. If it it rises, I mean game on. 220k eoy in play imo.

For the believers(@inversebrah)

For the bears (@C0inAlchemist)

EDIT: Thought this was the excited thread, not used to the new name yet.

Mellor

Deleted User wrote: »

Iceland is a good example of this. Given their geothermal energy output, many mining operations set up in Iceland to use geothermal energy which otherwise would have flowed into the ocean.

It would have disappeared, in the same way that a wind farm that isn't built doesn't generate any power. But the fact the geo-thermal generator exists means it is moving energy to he grid. If mining is using that then it displacing other power which is an issue.
If Icelands power is 100% renewable then it's no impact. And it may be, But the entire extent mining does not occur in 100% renewable zones.

What present of the total mined is mined in Iceland?

Sweetest Perfection wrote: »

Aren't we already 3 times past the point of no return with climate change? We're already doomed according to climate scientists, so going to zero carbon emissions worldwide tomorrow would do feck all unless we stay at zero for an unknown period of time. How would we do that?
Sending industry to India and China and introducing carbon taxes in the West is pure snake oil.
Also, how do we know climate change is bad in the long-long term? We don't.
I'll keep investing in crypto, thanks.

We are overdue the next iceage. Current warming may well be part of the entirely natural cycle that leads to the triggering of events that bring about the cooling. I think man made CO2 has nothing to do with it. The North Atlantic conveyor that keeps Ireland and Europe warm and polar bear free, has been weekening for a while. A Study suggests that it does this about 400 years prior to an ice age starting and strengthens 400 years before one ends.

SortingYouOut

cnocbui wrote: »

We are overdue the next iceage. Current warming may well be part of the entirely natural cycle that leads to the triggering of events that bring about the cooling. I think man made CO2 has nothing to do with it. The North Atlantic conveyor that keeps Ireland and Europe warm and polar bear free, has been weekening for a while. A Study suggests that it does this about 400 years prior to an ice age starting and strengthens 400 years before one ends.

Whatever about naturally occurring shifts in global temperature, we know that this shift in climate is man-made or is at least being expedited by man. The warming started after our industrialization, worsening since, with the rate of warming increasing as we developed globally and increased the burning of fossil fuels. 8 of the top 10 hottest days on record occurred in the decade that just passed with those just short of the record occurring after industrialization, and the records go back about 2000 years, which I know is nothing in Earth years, but to have such a shift in climate in such a short space of time, aligning perfectly with a massive increase in carbon emissions, can't be coincidental.

quinneerr

Am i worried?
Short term , a little
Medium to long term NO
End of discussion, close the thread, nothing more to discuss, you would not be here on a crypto forum if you did not believe crypto was going to be successful in the future, this thread is just Debbie Downers, doomsayer after doomsayer saying the end is nigh.
30-1-2018 was when this thread started, crypto has never been healthier, and we still have doom and gloom posters, if you feel that way sell up and leave crypto, it ain't for you.

SortingYouOut wrote: »

Whatever about naturally occurring shifts in global temperature, we know that this shift in climate is man-made or is at least being expedited by man. The warming started after our industrialization, worsening since, with the rate of warming increasing as we developed globally and increased the burning of fossil fuels. 8 of the top 10 hottest days on record occurred in the decade that just passed with those just short of the record occurring after industrialization, and the records go back about 2000 years, which I know is nothing in Earth years, but to have such a shift in climate in such a short space of time, aligning perfectly with a massive increase in carbon emissions, can't be coincidental.

We don't know that this is man made. It's an untested hypothesis. Did anthropogenic CO2 cause the medaeval warming, did it cause the warming spikes on this graph:

I look at that and all I see is the next scheduled bus arriving, right on time. The CO2 and temperature record has been inferred for most of the history of the Earth, not just 2000 years. We are currently - in geological time terms - experincing one of coldest periods in the planets history with some of the lowest levels of CO2 in the atmospere ever seen. Despite the imminent human extinction nonsense, the real norms for the Earth are for significantly higher average temperatures and a lot more CO2 - conditions under which plants and animals thrive, not die. Humans could easily live and thrive in those conditions as well. Agriculture would be far easier and vastly more productive. But I doubt we are close to the Earth returning to such norms. I think this is the warming you naturally get before an ice age kicks off.

Yes, it can be coincidental. The world actually cooled after WW2, despite CO2 output increasing due to wartime manufacturing. 5,000-7,000 years ago, the Earth was far warmer than in recent times. Ireland has a perfect example of this - the Céide Fields in Mayo. The reason they were settled and farmed was because the climate was far nicer, it was warmer, it didn't pour with rain every few hours and the sun shon. The neolithic peoples who settled there thrived - then the climate went to sh*t and the bogs developed. In northern Scotland you have the flow country - Europe's largest bog. 6000 or so years ago it didn't exist for the same reason it didn't at the Céide Fields. That whole are was covered in thick forest - b e c a u s e it was warmer with less rainfall. Did anthropogenic CO2 cause all that - the mid holocene warm period? No.

As you might suspect, i am not concerned about bitcoin mining.

Gas, denying climate change to justify bitcoin.

Similar mindset of Texas oilmen!

Pintman Paddy Losty

Dohnjoe wrote: »

*opinion

It might soar, or it might not, no one knows for sure. Global regulation, anything could happen. This "it will only ever go up" mentality that people have is borderline dogmatic.

I've had BTC for a long time, in my opinion it's pretty useless stuff, it's basically just a speculation token that doesn't produce anything. At best it's an "out of the system" hedge. As for the market, it's almost purely for speculation, there is little or no reason why any of that stuff is there other than for people to try and out-gamble each other. Each passing year this is more and more evident. DeFi and BC related tech is cool, but it's easy enough to replicate if there's an actual need.

In fairness. Great post.

Deleted User wrote: »

Gas, denying climate change to justify bitcoin.

Similar mindset of Texas oilmen!

Data centres consume 4-5 times as much energy as bitcoin mining - lets shut down the internet.

Dohnjoe

cnocbui wrote: »

Data centres consume 4-5 times as much energy as bitcoin mining - lets shut down the internet.

The internet is actually used for something

crushproof

Ah jeez where does it end?!

crushproof wrote: »

Ah jeez where does it end?!

Apparently the Chinese government published a new press release on limiting mining and trading.

I'll have to find a Chinese speaker to get exactly what they are saying :-) (the original source is below but the relevant part of the press release is translated by Google as "crack down on Bitcoin mining and trading behavior").

http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2021-05/21/content_5610192.htm?ivk_sa=1023197a

(funnily some BTC detractors have been mentioning mining concentration in China as a source of concern, so according to them this should be positive news :-))

Strange they should want to clamp down on the mining. Obvious FUD. China always knew what it was doing by holding a lot of BTC. It's gonna give them a great leg up over the US in years to come.