Study reveals Cryptocurrency mining energy consumption in China alone will be higher than Italy in three years

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Apr 9, 2021.

  1. tailspin

    tailspin Member

    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    7
    GPU:
    ARES II 6GB
    Someone should run the numbers on the carbon footprint of legacy banks world wide, include IMF and federal reserves. Pretty Shure HSBC, JPMorgan, Chase, Barlays, Commonwealth, ANZ etc use more electric than bitcoin miners. Article sounds like fud.
     
    UnrealGaming and Valken like this.
  2. Kool64

    Kool64 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,069
    Likes Received:
    414
    GPU:
    Gigabyte RTX2070S
    that literally describes China.
     
    Dragam1337 likes this.
  3. Astyanax

    Astyanax Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    10,305
    Likes Received:
    3,704
    GPU:
    GTX 1080ti
    stop being a xenophobe.
     
  4. Kool64

    Kool64 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,069
    Likes Received:
    414
    GPU:
    Gigabyte RTX2070S
    ignorance is bliss.
     
    Brasky likes this.

  5. Astyanax

    Astyanax Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    10,305
    Likes Received:
    3,704
    GPU:
    GTX 1080ti
    Your ignorance is terrifying, but the forum isn't for political discussion, big bully murrica aren't any less guilty of the same crimes china is frequently accused of, Just gotten better a hiding it.

    Move the discussion back to the subject matter of Crypto in China, not the chinese themselves.
     
    Mda400 likes this.
  6. haste

    haste Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,204
    Likes Received:
    368
    GPU:
    GTX 1080 @ 2.1GHz
    You've just described well over 50% of human population.
     
  7. 0blivious

    0blivious Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,115
    Likes Received:
    607
    GPU:
    5700XT / GTX1070
    Mental gymnastics should be an Olympic sport.
     
  8. TieSKey

    TieSKey Member Guru

    Messages:
    187
    Likes Received:
    65
    GPU:
    Gtx870m 3Gb
    Hey, I never said I justified it, don't put those words in my mo.. post?

    My point is we don't see any "studies" indicating how unnecessarily big cars will use more fuel than Spain by <random year>.
     
    carnivore likes this.
  9. TieSKey

    TieSKey Member Guru

    Messages:
    187
    Likes Received:
    65
    GPU:
    Gtx870m 3Gb
    And let's not forget that a lot (if not most) of the data/arguments talk about direct emission, when a huge chunk of what China produces is actually consumed by other countries. So, we me, you and Hilbert's dog consume a "made in china" product, the emissions generated to produce are on our belt, not theirs.
     
    UnrealGaming and Noisiv like this.
  10. Airbud

    Airbud Master Guru

    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    687
    GPU:
    PNY GTX 1060 XLR8
    yeah but we have plenty of fuel.....what we don't have is graphics cards?
     
    Brasky likes this.

  11. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,804
    Likes Received:
    3,359
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    No, you are just looking for apologist vectors which would do exactly that. And that's why I wrote it would be better if you just went and defended it without some attempts to misrepresent its moral status.
    Same way as you are again putting something you consider as waste into false comparison. (Just because it potentially uses more fuel than other car which delivers similar service.)

    But fundamental error is still unchanged. One does real work. Other only wastes resources.
    When you take HW and run current through it for sake of burning electricity and degrading it, you would feel stupid. But moment someone pays you, you feel smart.
    What if someone paid you for some other stupid activity? Would you feel smart about it?

    Actual equivalent to crypto mining is: "Being paid for running car engine on neutral for days, while wasting fuel, reducing life span of engine, and not creating anything of value."
    Humanity used to fight against entropy through creation. Crypto mining is opposite as taking high grade product (Silicon chips, electricity) and wasting it, is turning order back into chaos.
     
  12. Noisiv

    Noisiv Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,783
    Likes Received:
    1,135
    GPU:
    2070 Super
    Indeed.
    CO₂ emissions are measured on a production basis, meaning they do not correct for emissions embedded in traded goods.

    The goods produced by China and sold to us are counted toward China's CO2 output. Regardless of the fact that these goods are fulfilling our living needs.
     
  13. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,804
    Likes Received:
    3,359
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    Nothing surprising or wrong. It is same problem as empty crypto mining. They are paid for activity. They willingly accept such activity. And it is their choice to either aim or not to aim for CO2 neutrality.
    Locality of payment is irrelevant. Because producer (person who gets money for outputted product) is making choice and does with his earned money as he pleases.

    Same as when you do mining operation. For environment it does not matter if you sell everything within your country or export everything. What matters is if you use earned money to make your mining operation environment friendly or not.

    Logic you guys used is that people who create demand are responsible for consequences of actions taken to fulfill it.
    Imagine someone making Kickstarter campaign for nuking out Oceania, where money will go to countries using their nukes. Who will be guilty of damages? People who were willing to pay for this action or people who had authority to use nukes and did so?

    You do not have to move a finger even if someone offers you a lot of money for it. It is always your choice.
    When money are involved, people go stupid on purpose. And arguments like: "I am only doing my job." is usually something people say when they do not care much for anything else than money.
     
  14. Noisiv

    Noisiv Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,783
    Likes Received:
    1,135
    GPU:
    2070 Super
    1. I merely pointed out the FACTS
    2. ZERO speculations on my part
    3. Any additional logic behind my post is imputed by you
     
  15. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,804
    Likes Received:
    3,359
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    I had that feeling originally. But then I considered possibility that background of your post is not devoid of logic and reasoning. And that's supported by last sentence there:
    Would you not include it, I would be more inclined to consider your post being just statement of obvious. But that sentence turns your post into argument of locality.

    And that brings us to your actual reply with 3 points. You could have as well write: "My view on this is quite similar as yours. So why are you putting me into that bag?"
    And since you did not clearly stated one way or another. And you did not like being part of that particular bag. It brings up simple questions:
    "Who do you think bears responsibility? One who offers money for activity, or one who does activity for money?"
     

  16. Noisiv

    Noisiv Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,783
    Likes Received:
    1,135
    GPU:
    2070 Super
    [​IMG] Arguing with the mailman
    [​IMG] Trashing the mailman for delivering you just the mail.
    [​IMG] Giving him a piece of your mind, because he did not give you an opinion on the mail he just delivered.

    --
    Fox the Logic Guy

    [​IMG]
     
  17. UnrealGaming

    UnrealGaming Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,960
    Likes Received:
    290
    GPU:
    -
    oh look a millionth article about "bitcoin uses more energy than *insert whatever* ". As if they couldn't write an article like that about a million other things, far more useless ( arguably, but to each their own i guess ) than peer to peer censorship resistant money.
    And yeah, it better use that energy, that's the point of Proof of Work. That's literally how it defends itself against potential attackers, at least from that attack vector.
     
    Last edited: Apr 15, 2021
  18. UnrealGaming

    UnrealGaming Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,960
    Likes Received:
    290
    GPU:
    -
    Not only is it fud, its old stale fud. lol. Even those that fund this clueless-normie-bating nonsense see the end of the line:

    https://www.btctimes.com/news/paypal-launches-bitcoin-checkout-service

    https://www.btctimes.com/news/visa-plans-to-enable-bitcoin-purchases

    https://www.btctimes.com/news/Morgan-stanley-to-offer-clients-access-to-bitcoin-funds

    *insert million other related things*

    Not that anyone should be touching any of these centralized services, if they care about actually owning their Bitcoin and it's peer to peer censorship resistant nature.
     
    Last edited: Apr 15, 2021
  19. SplashDown

    SplashDown Master Guru

    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    158
    GPU:
    EVGA 980ti Classy
  20. Kaarme

    Kaarme Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,356
    Likes Received:
    983
    GPU:
    Sapphire 390
    Smaller countries don't spew more absolutely because the people are few and thus the need to spew more doesn't exist. You didn't care about Finland's climate and the resulting 30% of the emissions being connected to simply staying alive through the winter. So, why should I care about there being 1.4 billion Chinese? If they breed until they are billions, it's their problem to sort out. Every Chinese and the industry connected to them can then spew a lot less per person to compensate for their high numbers. I guess for you it would be okay if there were 10 billion Chinese and they would thus cause several times more emissions than now, huh? We have our circumtances, but at least our absolute amount is small because Finland is a small country. China is a huge country, so their absolute amount is huge as well, even if per capita it was smaller. The total CO2 and other greenhouse gases is everything that matters for the climate, not how much it's per a person.

    Yeah, yeah, their relative emissions. If there were 1.5 billion Americans, their relative emissions would also be somewhat smaller than now, not linearly, but significantly, I reckon. However, the total would be a whole lot more. Our planet and the atmosphere volume don't mysteriously grow when the popular population increases. Why do you think population control was such an important topic back in the 20th century? Nowadays everybody seems to have forgotten all about it.

    You are the one who suddenly started talking about Trump. I'd rather cut a finger off than be caught quoting Trump in a serious manner. Jokes are a different thing.

    Well, it's the the Kyoto Protocol, not Paris Agreement.
     

Share This Page