-------- Original message --------From: George Larson <[email protected]> Date: 12/11/17 7:45 AM (GMT-08:00) To: g2s <[email protected]> Cc: Michael Nelson <[email protected]>, [email protected] Subject: Re: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet > bitcoin generates huge amounts of pollution due to its electric demands "The physical money we use today requires a total of 11 terawatt-hours per year to produce. Gold mining, another very labor-intensive process, requires as much as 132 terawatt-hours. These numbers make Bitcoin and its 8.27 terawatt-hours look like a science fair project." https://themerkle.com/bitcoin-networks-electricity-consumption-is-lower-compared-to-printing-money/
On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 10:31 PM, g2s <[email protected]> wrote: -------- Original message --------From: Michael Nelson <[email protected]> Date: 12/8/17 6:22 PM (GMT-08:00) To: [email protected] Subject: Bitcoin... Destroying the planet > The mapping between Bitcoin and energy is missing the point... Not if the point is a dead planet. That's ALL I care about. Cars, which you mention, are another much thornier issue because they've been made a social necessity and that will take time to undo. As with another not often acknowledged source of carbon based pollution due to humans... The factories that make damn near everything consumer industrial societies have. But unlike those things, bitcoin generates huge amounts of pollution due to its electric demands, and, bluntly, it isn't necessary in any way shape or form. Rr You're forgetting how to add. As in added electrical demand and concurrent pollution in the here and now. Furthermore, we learn in Sociology 1 that as dirty as primitive societies are about their energy use, they use the energy MUCH more efficiently, and I suggest that applies to any "improvement" in currency as well. Scaled, btc will be less efficient in its use of energy leading to "dead planet". To clarify that... dead as far as human survival. Rr
