keep in mind the exact spot in the region you are in will vary based on locally available power, like Hydro is only 2% of the power for my region but the main lines in my area are coming from a Hydro dam that is like a 10-15 minute drive from my house.
and what the fuck does that have anything to do with anything I've ever fucking said ANYWHERE you TROLL RETARD?
I've literally NEVER WATCHED FOX BUSINESS and could give two shits about it.
this is a NICEHASH subreddit for discussing CRYPTO CURRENCY, this specific thread is about POWER USAGE of miners, I linked to an EPA SITE, NOT FOX BUSINESS, that allows you to see where the power generations for your area of the country comes from, at no point did I bring up Fox in any way shape or form, maybe you should get back on those meds you are clearly off of.
Another thing that's interesting about bitcoin mining. Where it's happening at scale, it's a clue to two things:
stranded power - probably renewables, since it's "out there" and far from where it could be consumed.
realistic and supportive politics of power generation - meaning, instead of setting aside spare power and hoping and praying for an Alcoa aluminum smelter, and jobs, and a tax base, they truly have spare power and just want to make money. These are apolitical power sources. Like the sun outside. It just shines everywhere on earth. Whoever lets you bitcoin mine near their power plant is okay with making some money because of their intermittent and hard to store or transmit overcapacity.
I'm very sceptical over the claims. Miners look for the cheapest source of energy available. Do you think all/most of that is renewable? Even if they were, aren't they robbing others of renewable energy then?
I love Bitcoin. But this kind of unabashed enthusiasm would make us simply delusional.
There are papers written that suggest that as much as 80% of all bitcoin mining is occuring through renewable sources, so yes, most of it is indeed renewable.
btc mining also heavily encourage opening of new hydro power plants that would waste the power anyway as they are too far from society to actually use most of it. not hard to set up some PC's at a hydroplant. suddenly 90% of the power they were originally just wasting is now used to make bitcoin. even at a break even that would vastly increase profits.
edit: rip u/diydude2 beat me to it.
Where the energy might be found, and where the energy can be used, are going to be in two different places.
If you are super lucky, they are right next to each other. But a lot of places on Earth, the power supply is in one place and the consumers in another.
To get power to where it needs to go, you need to either send it over power lines (hydro, solar, coal plants, natural gas plantes, nuclear plants), or ship it as chemical energy as solid, liquid or gas. (coal, gasoline, natural gas etc).
Some sources of stranded power are hydro plants high in the mountains and no cities or UHV power lines to move the energy. Or you could have gas fields just flaring gas off into the atmosphere uselessly.
If you said - well, we should just not build hydro in the middle of nowhere, and not dig for natural gas just to have it flare off uselessly - YES - I agree. That is called malinvestment, and it needs to stop.
If the damage is already done, or they intend, someday, to afford something better, or they want to defray the costs of a system that just naturally has too much power sometimes and would rather sell the spare capacity - like wind, hydro, etc, those are going to have times when they have too much. Well, now they can recoup their costs.
Most miners operate in areas where there is a big surplus of hydro-power that would otherwise be largely wasted.
In fact, this is a theme: they use energy that would otherwise be wasted, as in the case of the natural gas burn-offs in Canada.
The next step will be to use the heat generated by the mining rigs to, I don't know, produce food in greenhouses. Seems like Canada could use some heat.
Honestly wouldn't even be surprised if they brought these out solely to fuck bitcoin. A lot of people wouldn't mine anymore or would be unable to mine for a profit.
Either way, if it happens, it would be interesting to see what effect it would have on btc price. I imagine mining would slowdown or even cease altogether wherever theres these taxes and anywhere there isn't would pick up when the price inevitably rises because of it.
It's doubtful that the taxation rate wouldn't be progressive. I'm guessing it would start at trucking company level or large cattle farms but would be based on ppm each company generates or uses off the grid.
Eh I’d say taxing them could at least incentivize them to create less carbon. Sure we do need these things but we don’t necessarily need one use plastics to survive.
Maybe a different type of carbon tax could be used such as how much a company invests in renewables or something
Think of it this way: coal based energy generation is “demand oriented”. Ie logistically speaking they will generate amount as close as possible to what demand there will be and if it is beyond some capacity they have to deal with logistics and storage of the fossil fuel. Therefore apart from small amount of excess capacity they won’t be selling it for cheap.
On the other hand if you have a hydroelectric central, the capacity is supply based. You set it up on a strong river you get plenty of electricity. Sometimes you have way more than what is needed, thus you start incentives for industries to use your excess electricity for very cheap (it goes to waste otherwise anyways).
Miners can choose where to open shop, and it is for their benefit (not really due to green initiative tbh) to do it near these locations where electricity is dirt cheap. The result actually makes them use clean energy though.
Yep and you can do your part by creating your own electricity and storing it. Add batteries later and a controller to only use the battery power during peak times. If you can move from flat rate billing.
Do you know of any commercially available hydrogen fuel cells? I plan on adding solar in the next 2 years and will be adding batteries (power storage).
When I stated batteries I did not specifically mean traditional "batteries" but electric storage device. There are many different options lead acid, Nickle iron, lithium, and gravity (pumping water up hill).
That is not how it works. Miners are incentivized to consume energy in proportion to the VALUE of the Bitcoins mined, not the absolute number. If the price is $50,000 / BTC in 5 years, the total value of Bitcoins mined per block would be 2.5x higher than today, and energy consumption would be expected to be similarly higher.
You're right, but all other things kept equal, the amount of energy consumed will undergo a significant decrease with time due to the successive halvlings.
And the 50k prediction is overly optimistic IMO ( I won't complain if that happens though :).
Keep in mind if the larger economic situation is kept equal, which for the past year has meant (very roughly) and average of about $10 million dollars per day of new dollars coming into bitcoin to absorb the mining rewards, the price would "double" if that same amount of money chases only half as many new coins per day.
That number - the new capital inflow - is what miners are competing for, and is probably the dominant factor in the price when the market gets quiet (which is typically in the depths of a bear market).