Bitcoin and the Power Grid


“Bitcoin is evil” articles exist in profusion, and these days I pretty much ignore them. But one of the recent types – raising awareness of Bitcoin’s environmental unsustainability – has engaged me. As it turns out, I have an unusual background to bring to this topic, and I think I should contribute.

So, here we go:

Another Apocalypse?

Let’s be honest and admit that most of the “environmental movement” sells fear of an apocalypse. And as we should all realize by now, humans have an innate weakness for fear.

More or less every apocalyptic environmental prediction has failed. (I’m talking about those that could actually be measured, obviously.) That won’t stop the fear-sellers of course, and now Bitcoin has come into their sights.

The fear is that because crypto mining uses so much power, it will bring down the grid or cause various environmental disasters. The advocates of this fear throw around scary sounding numbers (measured in terawatts) and assorted scientific terminology. (“They understand it and you don’t… don’t expose yourself to ridicule.”)

But it’s mostly just fear. Sure, proof-of-work sucks up power, but that’s nothing new. How much power do you suppose all those millions of air conditioners suck up every summer? I haven’t dug up the figures, but I’m ready to take bets that it’s several times more than crypto mining. Shall we now fear the air conditioner?

Further Factors

I worked for decades in the electrical industry, and so I’d like to give you some facts from that perspective:

  • Power use has been going up since the beginning. These days most houses get 200 amperes of electrical service. But there are still thousands of houses that are wired with only 60 amperes. That was plenty 60 years ago. New loads (devices using power) come along all the time. In just my time, we’ve added air conditioning, microwaves, and lots of computers.

  • Mining is a nice, steady load. The kind power companies thrive on. What makes their lives crazy are seasonal loads like air conditioning, which occur only a few months per year.

  • Power failures happen every year, especially in summer due to the aforementioned air conditioning load. It’s a good bet that several fear-sellers have press releases ready to go for this summer.

  • The utilities are making money on this. More power use means more income.

  • If people use too much power, the providers will raise their prices. Econ 101.

And the Big One

Cryptocurrencies don’t finance war.

The public hasn’t actually paid for a war since WW2. Since then the whole game’s been run on credit. (The same goes, more or less, for everything Big Guv does to save us poor, helpless sheep.)

With Bitcoin and all the cryptos that I know of, you can’t do such things. If you want to throw a war in a crypto-based economy, you’ll have to convince people to pay for it. Good luck.

* * * * *

A book that generates comments like these, from actual readers, might be worth your time:

  • I just finished reading The Breaking Dawn and found it to be one of the most thought-provoking, amazing books I have ever read… It will be hard to read another book now that I’ve read this book… I want everyone to read it.
  • Such a tour de force, so many ideas. And I am amazed at the courage to write such a book, that challenges so many people’s conceptions.
  • There were so many points where it was hard to read, I was so choked up.
  • Holy moly! I was familiar with most of the themes presented in A Lodging of Wayfaring Men, but I am still trying to wrap my head around the concepts you presented at the end of this one.

Get it at Amazon ($18.95) or on Kindle: ($5.99)


* * * * *

Paul Rosenberg

10 thoughts on “Bitcoin and the Power Grid”

  1. “… It’s a good bet that several fear-sellers have press releases ready to go for this summer.”
    Bank on it.

  2. Very interesting, Paul. It would be great if you’d write more about environmentalism.
    You might like the book The Rational Optimist.
    I’ve fallen for a lot of the fear campaigns over the years. And, I’ve seen how angrily and irrationally the people who believe in them react when you cast even a little doubt.
    So I’m not exactly one of them. However, I can’t shake the conclusion of doom when I look at various trends – fishery collapses, topsoil depletion, rainforest razing, and tonnes of people way smarter than me saying climate change is a big deal.
    Maybe it’s something about my personality, and not so much the reality/facts. I don’t know.
    Also, I think you’re misrepresenting the environmental argument against Bitcoin, It’s not mine, so I’m not representing, but I think it’s electricity comes mostly from coal. Burning coal puts mercury into the environment (which ends up in fish) and CO2 into the air. Therefore, a power-hungry technology contributes to these bad things.
    Interestingly, a lot of the predicted growth in power consumption didn’t happen here in Australia. After A/C, most of the home amenities people have added have been low power stuff like electronics.

    1. Sorry Greg, I have time only fpr this today: “I think it’s electricity comes mostly from coal.”
      Very little electricity comes from coal these days. It’s mainly gas (much, much cleaner than coal) and nuclear (no hydrocarbons at all.) It’s possible that Australia’s an exception, but I dunno.

        1. No, according to your chart, coal use is 14% in the US, not 38%:
          I don’t know of a single coal plant still in service; they’ve all converted to gas. But, perhaps the chart makers know things I do not.
          In any event, it doesn’t matter: If you’re serious about this you need to go after the air conditioning industry. Mining is small potatoes.

          1. Yes, coal is 14% of total energy used but 38% of electricity production’s fuel (from the LLNL chart). My point is that’s not “very little” (though before researching this I thought it would be a lot higher so gratitude to you).
            Global annual energy use for a/c: 300 TWh (but, that figure is from 20 years ago and for residences only).
            Global annual energy use for Bitcoin: 70 TWh (but, Bitcoin covers just a tiny fraction of financial transactions currently).
            If Bitcoin were to replace just 100,000 Visa transactions, we’d be looking at 35 million TWh annually. Wow! Total world electricity production is only 20,000 TWh.
            I’m just interested in finding truth and don’t really have a position, but I think these facts are compelling enough to inform position. At the very least, Bitcoin’s energy consumption puts a cap on its scalability that’s not too far from where it’s at now. Maybe Lightning (or a proof-of-stake crypto) will change all of that.

      1. Many crypto miners locate near hydro and geothermal (Iceland) power generation locations to minimize cost. (Maybe some are environmental worriers too).

    2. More CO2 in the air is good for plants and trees. If you’re concerned about increasing CO2, do you mind sharing how many trees you’ve planted in recent months/years, or any other actions you’re personally undertaking w.r.t this trend?

      1. “More CO2 in the air is good for plants and trees.”
        Yep, that’s the basic biology that we all know. But how much is too much? And even if that’s a good effect, are the bad effects (ie. ocean acidification) a bigger problem?
        I have no idea – these questions are complicated and take years of study to understand completely. Which is why I listen to what scientists have to say about it. I don’t have an opinion either way; I’m stuck relying on smart people.
        And, the “more CO2 is good for plants” argument has been addressed many times by people who know more than you or I.
        I keep my critical brain engaged and apply logic, but I think you’ll agree those tools aren’t usually sufficient to evaluate the veracity of the scientists’ claims. We just don’t know enough.
        “If you’re concerned about increasing CO2, do you mind sharing how many trees you’ve planted in recent months/years”
        That’s funny. I realize that’s an attempted personal attack, but I actually have planted over 150 trees on our property. About two dozen just two months ago. We own 22 acres. I can share before/after pictures if you’re interested.
        We’re also practicing rotational grazing to increase the carbon in the soil (for better soil mostly, not the climate) and ‘benign neglect’ when it comes to weeds for the purposes of soil/ecosystem repair.
        So, yeah, I’m not some keyboard jockey sitting in a cubicle.

      2. tl;dr: About 150 trees, plus other soil repair techniques on my 22 acres.
        Sure, CO2 is good for plants and trees, but bad for oceans… it’s complicated so we’d better listen to smart people who study the situation.

Comments are closed.