|
|
|
|
|
by pmiller2
1996 days ago
|
|
Au contraire, I appreciate your "educated" opinion here. I just want to make sure I'm sufficiently "educated," so I can believe the exact same thing you do, with a straight face. If you didn't want it that way, you shouldn't have led with it. Regarding A), there's no particular reason why that electricity can't be sent across power lines. B) So what? Send it anyway, and replace 85-92% of the energy use. |
|
Now let's talk about your unique points than the original person I replied to: places have had decades to send more power over power lines and they didn't. You tell me why that is. I assume there were financial reasons and related impracticalities. But admittedly I have never asked and only react to the reality that energy producers have been receptive to the additional use of their energy for the aforementioned reasons I listed. Their output hasn't changed and to them it is a more efficient use of it. Are they lying? Are they ignorant of alternatives? Just lazy even though their laziness would therefore predate crypto mining?
Either way mining on premise is an immediately applicable economic incentive that simply got you to notice that you didn't like it.
Best case scenario then is that it gets you into action to implement a solution nobody else noticed was applicable. Society might be getting somewhere because of you, that's so exciting.