RT @dchem: 1. They paid for it, so energy is theirs to use.
2. There is no shortage right now.
3. You can’t store electricity easily at a massive scale
4. Natural gas plants are usually on standby because they are supposed to be used for providing excess capacity during peak demand times. https://t.co/cKBJNsJX2y
RT @mims: Natural gas power plant is using 14 megawatts a day to mine bitcoin in upstate New York.
That's enough power for 11,000 homes.
Is this really the best use of fossil fuels that were probably fracked out of the ground?
In 30 days they make $1.5M.
11,000 residents with a monthly bill of at least $136 would equivalent. So this is not highly lucrative compared to their normal business. This is a waste of CO2.
However, if this is gas that would have been flared anyway due to lack of pipeline capacity, it’s ok.
What do they do with the accumulated BTC? Are they hodling? Selling on the open market? Are they disclosing the BTC for tax purposes? Enquiring minds want to know!
eburnsidePlatinum | QC: BTC 170 | TraderSubs 313 weeks ago
It seems like a good use of excess power but this shouldn't be allowed.
They should instead be required to sell the excess power cheap, as it is an unfair monopolistic advantage and they do it to keep their rates artificially high for other local commercial and industrial operations that could use the excess power if offered it at a reasonable rate.
Watch them use the equipment setup costs and power consumption from bitcoin mining as an expense when they go to the PUC next year and need to justify the latest retail rate hikes...
If we can agree that fiat money is just numbers in computers and that corrupt men and women in banks and governments essentially control it or have poor monetary policy, then Bitcoin should probably be on your radar. Bitcoin is the most secure network in the world and with a monetary policy that is in it algorithm (difficult to change without consensus). It has all the properties necessary to be a perfect money, whether it is adopted or not, that does not change the facts.
Mining is how the bitcoin blockchain (and many others that use proof of work) is protected. In order to attack the blockchain successfully and modify it, you would need a quantity of energy greater than the entire mining network. It's not a waste of energy, it's energy used to protect your coins. Now, could mining farms be utilizing cleaner energy is a whole other discussion but it's basic econ when you get down to it. If you're curious, read up on a 51% attack.
Mining is just a waste of energy intended to provide value to the coin. It's burning fossil fuels and releasing carbon dioxide to make fake internet bucks. If it wasn't the power plant doing it it would be some other miner doing it even less efficiently, so it's really a problem with the currency model not the power plant.
It could be a reasonable thing to do for a power plant that sometimes has surplus power generation that it doesn't have the storage for and which would otherwise go to waste. But it sounds like that's not the case here since this non-renewable energy power plant is now running year round specifically to mine Bitcoin.
There's also a growing problem with Bitcoin taking increasing amounts of processing power and therefore energy to verify transactions as it ages. It doesn't scale well. It's less of a problem then it might be, because most people seem to have lost interest in treating it as a currency and are just interested in speculating on it as a commodity. But if people were actually using in their day to day lives to pay for things, all that overhead might get to be a real problem. It's a bit of a Catch 22, because I don't see why anyone would be interested in Bitcoin as a commodity if they don't see widespread adoption as a functional currency as the end goal.
The problem seems to be the means of energy production not mining itself. Does anyone have numbers on how much energy gold mining and traditional banks use to run their operations?
If the world produced energy with renewable energy, would you still have an issue with bitcoin mining?
Just because you don't see the value in something doesn't mean others don't value it. Bitcoin is valuable because it is the most-scarce liquid asset in existence, which makes it the best store of value.
"But volatility! High transaction costs!" The market has spoken, and it is gradually concluding that those are not particularly bothersome when weighed against the benefits Bitcoin provides as a staggeringly scarce digital commodity.
It does not take more processing power as it ages. More people compete to mine and therefore earn Bitcoin as a reward. Mining secures the network and processes the decentralised transactions. Energy consumption is not required to scale at the same place as adoption. If 1000% more people use Bitcoin then it is not required to use 1000% more energy.
Once all Bitcoin is mined, it will make the coin more stable eliminating all the other fees tied to normal currencies. My favorite out currently is called xtz. They really have everything you want in a currency. Even 5.3%apy on holdings higher than any institution. Fyi
The thing is, people expect its value to increase over time. Currencies usually don't do that, if for no other reason that is that were the case it'd encourage hoarding rather than using it for its intended purpose (i.e. to facilitate trade).
> if for no other reason that is that were the case it'd encourage hoarding rather than using it for its intended purpose
Yup. BTC is inherently deflationary. And if they ever fully mine all the coins, then it will be a finite monetary supply vs. a growing civilization. Again, deflationary.
"Comprised of nearly 7,000 mining rigs and powered by electricity generated on-site,"
Technically the electricity is "generated" on site but the natural resource consumed for that electricity generation is derived offsite from the environment. The mining of gas by fracking manifests itself as wholesale environmental destruction of clean air, water and soil, and reduction in quality of life of locals due to noise and traffic.
"Greenidge uses its own "behind the meter" power, the generated electricity it uses itself at the basic cost of production"
Natural Gas industry is a short sighted extraction industry that does not include in its " basic cost of production" immeasurable and invaluable resources like clean water air or soil.
Poisoning the environment for hundreds and possibly thousands of years with concentrated radium deposits, forever chemicals in water along with ruining entire communities in order to produce power to then mine bitcoin is bad for bitcoin. Bitcoin should have a green agenda.
The server farm currently consumes 14 megawatts of the 106 megawatts of Greenidge's capacity. That's enough electricity to power well over 11,000 average U.S. homes.
Fracking should be banned nationally as it is in majority of Europe. New York State has banned Fracking statewide and others plan to follow.
Isn't there a limit though? As in, Bitcoin only has a certain amount in the block chain? How close is everyone to mining all the coin? Isn't that coming soon? And won't big mining operations like this deplete the coin faster?
21 million total BTC, the last of which will be mined around 2140. Adding hashpower does not change that timeline, rather, it causes the difficulty of mining each block to increase, maintaining a ~10 min/mined block schedule.
Idk about 5, but here goes. The 'blocks' you always here about are essentially a list of transactions, (A gave 1 Bitcoin to B etc.)
These blocks are disguised by a hash function so instead of the example transaction it might look like 1f!gX4l?t8 ( but way longer)
Miners add a value called a nonce, with the sole purpose of changing the output of their hash function. Hash functions will produce a totally different output if even a little of the input data changes. So they keep guessing nonces to hash in and get a special result. The goal being a hash output with some leading number of 0s so it looks like 0000x!T6&fH3 or something. If a output with the right number of 0s is discovered, the miner confirms the block of transactions and gets a btc reward
Bitcoin uses what's called Proof of Work concensus, which essentially states that the record can be considered accurate based on how much work is required to generate it.
The math problem of finding a nonce that hashes with a block to produce the leading zeroes is just that, work. Miners and btc clients automatically respect the balances and transactions of the longest reported block chain, which as we've discussed is a lot of work to generate.
Essentially, by making blocks hard to add to the chain, we are betting that no one person will have enough computing power to control the network, since the rest of the network will surely have more total computing power and thus produce a longer blockchain, which neutral clients will automatically respect.
If one person had more than half the network computing power, a 51% attack would be possible, and allow them to double spend btc among other issues.
Too little, too late. Hope is a mistake and a lie.
Grief requires us to know the time we’re in. The great enemy of grief is hope. Hope is a four-letter word for people who are willing to know things for what they are. Our time requires us to be hope-free. To burn through the false choice of being hopeful and hopeless. They are the two sides of the same con job. Grief is required to proceed.
Far better it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides. The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.