Electricity should have a variable price depending on who is buying it.
A home? A certain regulated price. Hospitals? A certain regulated price.
AI and Data Centers? A heavily taxed price.
Sweet, I asked a related question about ethically sourcing the electricity for the worthless computing cycles that could be used in less parasitic ways.
So about the cost of the energy for the imaginary money, bro?
I'm asking you Reid.
Do you believe bitcoin "mining" should have to account for how the electricity is generated?
Nothing about your sister or her choices. About the livable future her and her children may not have.
There are people setting up gas generators and mining rigs next to natural gas wells to bypass the transmission infrastructure and evade environmental regulation. You can't blame that on the grid supply.
NatGas is a fossil fuel.
60% of electricity produced in the U.S. is generated using fossil fuel.
Bitcoin mining, like hospitals, schools, office buildings, you and your electronic lifestyle, emits zero CO₂.
The device you’re currently using to read this skeet uses electricity and emits zero CO₂
Your local power plant OTOH burns biomass to generate electricity.
And yet, if not for this device, it would burn less fossilized biomass. That is what we mean when we talk about a carbon footprint.
My conscience is clean, because it's so much less than is burned for Bitcoin that it's negligible in comparison, but the causal chain exists.
One answer is: no phone, no computer, no HVAC, no washer/dryer, no car, no lights.
But that's not technological progress.
In your modern-day life - and in developing countries - using *more* electricity is the goal: phones, HVAC, Internet.
Nobody's going back to ice blocks to cool their food.
What does this have to do with Bitcoin or bsky or smartphones or fish tanks or HVAC or the internet?
Kardashev Type I is the goal, and humans require WAY more energy to get there.
1/ Here’s what you actually need:
The Rolls-Royce Micro-Reactor will provide reliable, autonomous energy solutions to multiple markets. Providing zero-emission power, our advanced nuclear technologies support many global Net Zero targets, solving energy dependence across many industries.
…
The present emissions problem is not that we lack the technology to replace fossil fuels, but that doing so requires scarce resources and time. The only marginally carbon-free electricity we have is overnight wind surplus. But miners mostly run 24x7.
Indeed, we don't lack the tech to replace fossil fuels.
Don't be boxed in by the *scarce resources and time* negative-Nancy thinking. Rolls-Royce is taking action.
As far as Bitcoin miners running 24/7, so does *all* of modern life. And energy needs must be *increased* to reach Kardashev Type I.
If the miners switch to their own personal nuclear generators, they'd no longer be significantly contributing to global warming. But they won't, because their profit relies on their electricity being cheaper than others' energy, and nuclear isn't cheap.
If modern electronic-based societies switched to their own personal nuclear generators, they'd no longer be significantly contributing to global warming.
You, your family, your loved ones - everyone - uses electricity. Developing nations are on-boarding to electricity.
Onwards!
Let’s dispel the myth that your device, your HVAC, your washer and dryer, Bitcoin mining burns anything. Those items don’t *burn* anything.
Your electronic lifestyle, modern amenities, and Bitcoin mining use electricity.
Now imagine all⚡️is generated using non-fossil fuel renewables.
Bitcoin, HVAC, the Internet, modern living do *not* delay anything.
Progress:
"In 2023, ~60% of this electricity generation was from fossil fuels—coal, natural gas, petroleum, and other gases. About 19% from nuclear energy, and about 21% from renewable energy sources."
www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/f...
