[tromp]

> Dogecoin has exactly the same energy spending incentives as Bitcoin.

While the incentives are the same, Dogecoin has roughly 7.4x lower energy requirements than Bitcoin currently, so accepting Dogecoin instead of Bitcoin is a tad less offensive.

[swinglock]

Only because it's not used.

This is like arguing we should switch from using cars currently on the road because they use energy, to cars currently standing in a garage, because we measured and clearly the parked cars use less energy than the cars on the road.

It's not even hyperbole, it's precisely equivalent and just as boneheaded as it sounds.

[arss]

This is not true. Dogecoin is way lower KW per hash than bitcoin. Dogecoin is .12 and bitcoin is 707 https://www.trgdatacenters.com/most-environment-friendly-cry...

[varajelle]

... because it is not used. The difficulty is adjusted depending on the amount of minors, which would increase if the price increase.

[swinglock]

KW per hash, are you pulling my leg? What does washer fluid consumption per turn signal rate has to do with anything?

[La1n]

With a market cap that is 20 times lower, higher market cap means higher prices, means more miners and thus more energy requirement

[tromp]

Not quite. Energy requirements correspond to daily dollar emission (column PoW produced 24h in [1]).

Early in their emission, coins can have high daily emission and low marketcap. And dogecoin is at less than 1/3 of its 500B soft total supply [2].

[1] https://www.f2pool.com/coins

[2] https://john-tromp.medium.com/a-case-for-using-soft-total-su...

[square_usual]

Musk said they were looking for crypto with an energy requirement of <1% of bitcoin's, so that would rule Doge out too.

[tromp]

He should look at the one that uses 0.15% of bitcoin's while having a much more even distribution than Dogecoin (which had 20x block reward in its first year).