navitron
 
Renewable Energy and Sustainability Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Anyone wishing to register as a new member on the forum is strongly recommended to use a "proper" email address - following recent spam/hack attempts on the forum, all security is set to "high", and "disposable" email addresses like Gmail, Yahoo and Hotmail tend to be viewed with suspicion, and the application rejected if there is any doubt whatsoever
 
Recent Articles: Navitron Partners With Solax to Help Create A More Sustainable Future | Navitron Calls for Increased Carbon Footprint Reduction In Light of Earth Overshoot Day | A plea from The David School - Issue 18
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: How much of our Climate Change Crisis is caused by this ? discuss  (Read 876 times)
bxman
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 623


« on: February 12, 2018, 07:46:31 PM »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-43030677

more than the speculators are prepared to admit I suspect
Logged
gravyminer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 412



« Reply #1 on: February 12, 2018, 09:40:16 PM »

Errr its all supposedly renewable ( green )energy in Iceland  isnt it ?
Is the picture misleading ?  it looks like a smokestack .......

When BTC dropped briefly below $6k it became uneconomical to mine it in most countries due to computer running costs
As each 'coin' is harder to mine than the previous one, it requires more computer ( and electrical ) power to create it
So there will be self limiting effects unless BTC really does go to $500k and John Macaffe gets a special treat

https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@jrcornel/bitcoin-to-usd500-000-within-3-years-or-he-ll-eat-his-what

Theres quite a few alternative crypto's to BTC, some specifically developed to address the perceived shortcomings of BTC

There seems to be a younger generation that is attracted to decentralised money that is not controlled by central banks and governments
but there will be attempts by governments to control and regulate crypto currencies.

I have no crypto holdings but  watch its evolution in fascination.


Logged

gravyminer
azps
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 540



WWW
« Reply #2 on: February 13, 2018, 09:34:24 AM »

Errr its all supposedly renewable ( green )energy in Iceland  isnt it ?
Is the picture misleading ?  it looks like a smokestack .......

It's all renewable electricity, yes. And geothermal plants do have chimneys for steam / water vapour.
Logged

Ted
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3872



« Reply #3 on: February 13, 2018, 10:20:26 AM »


When BTC dropped briefly below $6k it became uneconomical to mine it in most countries due to computer running costs


That can't be factual as it is only in the last six months that BTC has gone above $1k in value. The cost of electricity hasn't gone up by 600% in the same time. The main mining operations have always been in countries with low power costs.

Part of the problem is that the recent increased value has brought in more miners which decreases the amount any one miner can expect to realise thereby making it, in aggregate, more expensive to mine. Mining and mining successfully are two different things - as anyone involved in the Klondike gold-rush could testify.

But wasting electricity - even if it is 100% renewable - is still a waste.
Logged

Volunteer moderator
gravyminer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 412



« Reply #4 on: February 14, 2018, 12:33:01 AM »

Reckon you have a point Ted.
I blindly took it from an article that was more about a change in general market conditions and possibly did no analysis

from   https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption

it looks as if it requires 634 kwh per transaction ( which I take to indicate a bitcoin is successfully created)  so approx 100 in electrical use to create an item currently worth just over 6000 ............

But if the miners are using low value generation during off peak hours ( which is when some of the big financial orgs computers get redeployed ) with systems that are generally kept running even when not being fully utilised, its not obvious just how much climate change might be triggered.

How much climate change has the SETI project triggered, as they shared out data that needs to be analysed among thousands of individual computer owners ?
« Last Edit: February 14, 2018, 12:41:59 AM by gravyminer » Logged

gravyminer
RIT
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1702


« Reply #5 on: February 14, 2018, 03:27:45 AM »

Part of the problem is that the recent increased value has brought in more miners which decreases the amount any one miner can expect to realise thereby making it, in aggregate, more expensive to mine. Mining and mining successfully are two different things - as anyone involved in the Klondike gold-rush could testify.

The process does not work like that. As more Bitcoins are mined (well in fact mathematically found) the level of difficulty is raised, so it takes more work to find the next bitcoin. The whole process was designed to make it harder to find valid results over time/coins found. In the last 6 months the level of difficulty has increased by nearly a 4x and over the last 2 years the increase has been 614x.

The original designer of the process was a very clever guy as the whole thing is built around a process that builds complexity and therefore scarcity as and when the concept goes main stream. The issue is then backed up by the fact that there is a finite number of Bitcoins that can be found. For the people involved in this 'world' this finite number is what is driving them as it indicates a limited resource - few people seem to have noticed that it is possible to have an infinite number of Bitcoin like solutions and at the last count their was already 1,300 different coins around.

Even a Bitcoin has zero scarcity as while there can only be a maximum 21m of them they can be subdivided. Currently the system supports division down to 8 decimal places, but even this can be increased. Again this drives the current concept of scarcity as if you own a Bitcoin it could 'become' far more valuable if such a change takes place. The reality is far more mundane, any state or business that wants to use a coin based system will just deploy their own and mine the coins themselves.
Logged

2.4kW PV system, output can be seen at  - https://pvoutput.org/list.jsp?userid=49083

Why bother? - well, there is no planet B
Philip R
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1247


« Reply #6 on: February 15, 2018, 01:08:03 AM »

A good few years ago, it was stated that the internet consumed over 30 GW running the server farms. Must be a lot mor now. The Icelandic figures equates to an average of 100MW for bitcoin mining.

Cant criticise such activities without appraising my use of the internet.!!

Philip R

Logged
Ted
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3872



« Reply #7 on: February 15, 2018, 09:30:15 AM »


The process does not work like that. As more Bitcoins are mined (well in fact mathematically found) the level of difficulty is raised, so it takes more work to find the next bitcoin. The whole process was designed to make it harder to find valid results over time/coins found. In the last 6 months the level of difficulty has increased by nearly a 4x and over the last 2 years the increase has been 614x.

The level of difficulty can go down as well as up as it is designed as a "speed governor" that ensures the 1 block per 10 minutes metric and it is adjusted every 2016 blocks (2 weeks).  The more computational power being used by miners forces the difficulty level up and if the mining power drops off then so does the difficulty.
Logged

Volunteer moderator
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
Simple Audio Video Embedder
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!