Conversation

Dan Held
@danheld
Replying to
@danheld
13/ “Electricity consumption per transaction” is a poor KPI, here's why: - The energy spent is per block, not per transaction - The economic density of a Bitcoin transaction is increasing (Segwit, Lightning) - Should be defined by security of economic history
@LaurentMT
5
51
Dan Held
@danheld
14/ The rate of ASIC efficiency improvement is slowing. As efficiency gains slow we can expect an increase in manufacturer competition as margins narrow. All-in mining cost will shift from the upfront cost of ASIC hardware to the ongoing energy costs to operate.
Image
5
45
Dan Held
@danheld
15/ The cost of Bitcoin mining becomes the lowest (excess) value of electricity. This may solve a problem with renewable energy sources that have predictable capacity that is otherwise wasted, like hydro and flared methane.
Image
8
42
Dan Held
@danheld
16/ Aluminum was a popular means of "exporting" electricity from a country with abundant renewable energy resources that are stranded (ex: Iceland). As aluminum manufacturing matured over the decades, the kWh per Kg of aluminum produced became more efficient.
Image
6
36
Dan Held
@danheld
17/ PoW is the buyer of last resort for all electricity, creating a floor that incentivizes the building of new energy producing plants around disparate energy sources that would have otherwise been left untapped.
Image
8
47
Dan Held
@danheld
18/ “Imagine a 3D topographic map of the world with cheap energy hotspots being lower and expensive energy being higher. I imagine Bitcoin mining being akin to a glass of water poured over the surface, settling in the nooks and crannies, and smoothing it out.” -
@nic__carter
7
49
Dan Held
@danheld
19/ Some complain that Bitcoin mining doesn’t accomplish “anything useful” like finding prime numbers. Bitcoin is already doing something useful for society. It isn’t rational to ask miners to perform a function that is altruistic without incentives.
6
51
Dan Held
@danheld
20/ Everything requires energy. Claiming that one usage of energy is more or less wasteful than another is completely subjective since all uses have paid market rate to utilize that electricity.
Image
9
58
Dan Held
@danheld
21/ Bitcoin’s utilization of the electrical capacity consumes magnitudes less electricity than existing fiat systems which not only have power requirements banking infrastructure, but the military and political machina. The energy tradeoff is a “net positive” outcome.
10
52
Dan Held
@danheld
22/ Via Bitcoin, is the trustless settlement of trillions between counterparties annually + more grid stability + unseizable storing of value, worth the $15B in 2021 mining costs? I think the answer is a resounding yes.
9
65
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho
Replying to
@danheld
@LaurentMT
and
@nic__carter
Most of the folks that are against energy usage dont realize that 90% of bitcoin has already been mined, and the last 10% will use exponentially decreasing amounts of energy Its good that ASICs are reaching a plateau as we can start to reason about the long-term mining landscape
1
Aris Moumtzis
@logic_resonance
Replying to
@danheld
@LaurentMT
and
@nic__carter
It's a zero sum game, the energy needed is not free or green or brown. It's energy that's taken away from ppl that cannot afford high energy bills to be used to power rigs to produce an asset that does do much. Didn't some of the miners that were in China migrate to Kazakhstan?
1
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
Show