[lowkey]

To be clear, other than Bitcoin which uses proof of work, virtually all other cryptocurrencies use proof of stake which consumes only a modest amount of electricity, no more than any other server app.

So to be accurate, the real issue is Bitcoin mining, not altcoins. For the record, I am not a fan of altcoins but their energy use is not a sound argument against them.

The US military exists in large part to protect the US Petrodollar system that gives the dollar value. Bitcoin mining exists exclusively to protect the Bitcoin stored on the blockchain.

Why aren’t we talking about the US military since it consumes 1 million times the energy of Bitcoin mining for a similar use case, Almost all of it in the form of dirty fossil fuels and with no meaningful plan to go green?

[Melingo]

Bitcoin and Ethereum for quite a long time and now only Bitcoin.

Why we are not talking about the us military? Because it's a strawman argument.

[lowkey]

I don’t think Straw man means what you think it does. As I pointed out with the cases of the invasions of Iraq and Libya, both of which it is clear in hindsight were based on false pretenses, a major reason the US has such an enormous standing military with bases around the world is to protect the value of the US dollar.

Again, it is not a straw man to point out that both the military and Bitcoin miners both serve to protect the value of their currencies, or that while both consume a lot of energy, the US military consumes 1 million times as much energy as Bitcoin mining.

[Melingo]

It is because it's not about the military in this thread and you try to justify the energy usage of Bitcoin with the us military.

And I already agree that the energy consumption of the us military should also be checked and reduced.

[lowkey]

If the goal is to accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels and toward a clean energy future based on renewable energy, then Bitcoin mining helps us get there faster.

This is due to its unique property to act as a buyer of last resort for stranded or intermittent energy supplies. Bitcoin subsidizes green energy. Ban Bitcoin mining and we get less renewable energy capacity built.

Why should Bitcoin mining be banned?

[Melingo]

You remember the gas power plant in new York city which was offline and than got bought because of Bitcoin?

Pls walk me through a real example were Bitcoin makes more renewable energy net positive.

Because Bitcoin will consume ALL available energy.

[lowkey]

Fair point, but a single anecdote doesn’t equal the general case.

Texas is home to more Bitcoin miners than any other state. Up thread, I shared a detailed example from the Guardian explaining how the power purchase agreements between miners and energy utilities encourages investment in wind and solar build out to strengthen the Texas grid.

As someone who personally worked on the financial plan to build at the time the largest wind farm in Canada, I can say with confidence that wind and solar builds live and die on having enough long-term power purchase agreements to justify their financing.

From the article:

“If you were a miner that has a long-term power purchase agreement, then you own power at a fixed price … you’re committing to buying energy for years no matter what,” Les said.

As a bitcoin miner, you essentially own that power, and that allows you to work like a virtual power plant. You can take the power that you agreed to buy at a fixed lower price, and then you can sell that back to the grid.”

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/aug/17/bitcoin-c...