And it is caused by the global market for fossil fuels, it does not cause the global market for fossil fuels
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @FranckLeroy_ and
Actually, the beneficiaries of this relationship have stymied progress of nuclear power and renewables all over the world. Now we have a chance to shift to a world reserve currency that can run entirely on renewables instead of being linked to the oil industry.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gladstein @FranckLeroy_ and
I fucking hate how you people talk about speculative shit about "Who's really responsible for killing the electric car?" as though it is anywhere in the same ballpark as Bitcoin straight up DIRECTLY BURNING AND WASTING ENERGY to the tune of dozens of terawatt-hours per year
3 replies 8 retweets 75 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @gladstein and
It wouldn't matter if a shift in global energy markets pushed us to massively expand nuclear and renewable energy Because the Bitcoin miners would just use it all the fuck up and we still wouldn't be able to close any existing power plants
1 reply 9 retweets 53 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @gladstein and
If the *total amount of energy we use every year* is going UP, and going up EXPONENTIALLY, going in the exact wrong direction, it DOES NOT MATTER if we "shift" or "move" the balance of energy production toward renewables We'll still be burning more coal anyway
2 replies 8 retweets 52 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @gladstein and
You can say whatever you want about how you power the Bitcoin grid If you magically made a proof-of-work cryptocurrency that could ONLY be powered by renewable energy it would still be a fucking environmental disaster
2 replies 9 retweets 56 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @iridienne and
even if we had nuclear fusion ready to go (which it’s not) and installed everywhere in the world, the heat generated by cryptocurrency mining is going to massively contribute to pollution especially if corporations like microsoft keep trying to put data centers underwater
2 replies 2 retweets 15 likes -
Replying to @hipsterelectron @iridienne and
Yeah this is a basic and fundamental problem with the indefinite-growth model of capitalism that everyone assumes is inescapable If we need an exponentially-growing economy to survive, and that economy has an exponentially-growing energy demand, the waste heat keeps going up
2 replies 3 retweets 17 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @hipsterelectron and
It DOES NOT MATTER if we solve the problem of where the energy comes from completely (we climb up the Kardeshev scale and take all our power directly from the sun) And this has NOTHING TO DO with carbon dioxide HOLDING ON to heat in the atmosphere
1 reply 2 retweets 13 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @hipsterelectron and
It's just extremely simple math, the inescapable reality of thermodynamics Energy has to go somewhere, it turns into waste heat when you're done using it, it cannot just disappear
2 replies 2 retweets 17 likes
You crunch the numbers, if the physical energy economy has a couple centuries of the same exponential growth we just had in the 19th and 20th, it ends with melting the Earth's surface
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @hipsterelectron and
(This assumes more economic production means more energy intensive production, which I don’t think is correct)
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @lawnerdbarak @hipsterelectron and
This is true, but economic growth that doesn't use more physical energy looks very different from the kind we're used to And Bitcoin proof-of-work is designed to make it fundamentally impossible
1 reply 2 retweets 11 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.