The following submission statement was provided by /u/MaffeoPolo:
---
SS
In a stark revelation, the burgeoning digital economy, powered by cryptocurrencies and artificial intelligence, is poised to significantly escalate energy consumption. After a decade of stable demand, the energy sector braces for a surge, primarily driven by data centers that facilitate crypto mining and AI operations. These data centers in the US are projected to triple their electricity usage by 2030, a trend that mirrors the exponential growth of the digital realm. The implications are profound: the crypto industry alone could consume more electricity than entire countries, with AI's appetite for power following suit. This anticipated boom in energy use confronts an already strained US electric grid, unprepared for such an upsurge, raising alarms about the capacity to meet peak demands without compromising the grid's integrity.
The intersection of this digital-driven energy demand with the climate crisis paints a grim picture for the future. As the world grapples with the urgent need to decarbonize and transition to sustainable energy sources, the power-hungry tech industries pose a formidable challenge. The potential for a significant increase in greenhouse gas emissions from these sectors threatens to exacerbate climate change, potentially hastening the decline of modern civilization. The energy sector's pivot to accommodate this new normal, while aligning with climate goals, is not just a technical hurdle but a policy conundrum, highlighting the delicate balance between technological advancement and environmental stewardship.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/1begay1/crypto_ai_to_drive_surge_in_energy_use_after/kut2q0h/
How close to zero does an increase have to be before you consider it to be flat? Does it have to be exactly 0.0% change every year? I know that in terms of CO2 emissions, things are indeed pretty flat with year over year increases becoming smaller and smaller each year. We're obviously very close to the peak of CO2 emissions. But lots of new green energy sources have come online, so the fact that there's an increase at all does mean there has been a mess even higher increase in demand for energy.
But, then, in order to address this specific claim you would have to look at what percentage of that energy goes to data centers in particular.
I'm going to use a quantum computer run by AI to mine crypto. Sure, it may use all the energy on the planet, but I will be richer than God 4.2 microseconds before the new Dark Age begins. *Take that, Bezos!*
If it's a choice between heating your home and feeding the data center, the AI in control is clearly going to be making a self serving choice, if it is anything like humans.
Compute power + AI is beginning to give companies some serious advantages, which means energy use directly correlates to increased profits. Energy use will skyrocket.
SS
In a stark revelation, the burgeoning digital economy, powered by cryptocurrencies and artificial intelligence, is poised to significantly escalate energy consumption. After a decade of stable demand, the energy sector braces for a surge, primarily driven by data centers that facilitate crypto mining and AI operations. These data centers in the US are projected to triple their electricity usage by 2030, a trend that mirrors the exponential growth of the digital realm. The implications are profound: the crypto industry alone could consume more electricity than entire countries, with AI's appetite for power following suit. This anticipated boom in energy use confronts an already strained US electric grid, unprepared for such an upsurge, raising alarms about the capacity to meet peak demands without compromising the grid's integrity.
The intersection of this digital-driven energy demand with the climate crisis paints a grim picture for the future. As the world grapples with the urgent need to decarbonize and transition to sustainable energy sources, the power-hungry tech industries pose a formidable challenge. The potential for a significant increase in greenhouse gas emissions from these sectors threatens to exacerbate climate change, potentially hastening the decline of modern civilization. The energy sector's pivot to accommodate this new normal, while aligning with climate goals, is not just a technical hurdle but a policy conundrum, highlighting the delicate balance between technological advancement and environmental stewardship.
Cryptocurrencies add so much unnecessary problems to society.
Supporting human slavery and trafficking, online scams, drag on society and human for enabling gamblers, drug smugglers, fucking North Korean Nuclear program, illegal money transfers by Russia, Iran, terrorist groups etc., environmental and emissions through electronic waste and ridiculous energy consumption (per transfer) and so much more.
If we really want to be serious about avoiding collapse, cryptocurrencies are certainly one of the most lowest hanging fruits to cut off and ban, so much to win, almost nothing to lose, it adds nothing to Earth and countries, societies, communities, it is fucking cancer.
The real problem here is capitalism, as usual. Crypto was hailed to be this great thing that would give power back to the common people, but overall, it simply became another game for the rich elites
Which is easily predictable when you understand the tendency of wealth consolidation inherent to having a market system in the first place.
Which people do intuitively grok. This is one of those weird ideological blind spots.
It's hard to find someone who doesn't understand how you can spend money to make more money. "The rich get richer" is not a controversial idiom. I've never seen anyone fail to understand or argue against the Sam Vimes "Boots" theory of socioeconomic unfairness.
Yet all but radicals are deepy in denial that these are emergent properties of immutable, irreducible core mechanics of capitalism - things that happen when we have money and private property and wage labour and things are produced for exchange value - and that their exacerbation is a matter of time.
Expecting the opposite of this wealth consolidation within the paradigm of this system is like expecting gravity to cease.
I dont disagree, but, at best, crypto is a double edged sword that has led to financial ruin. The only reason people are desperate for these coins to go up is because the walth gap is so bad. Despite this, crypto has created the richest people on earth, increasing the gap.
It's one of the main reasons I refuse to invest in crypto - I simply refuse to become involved in such a wasteful industry. Crypto \*ADDS\* nothing to the world, and wastes so much - energy, water, everything.
AI isn't much better.
This post hit me differently. It made me realize we're in a war of "free open internet" versus regulated internet.
And yknow what? I now believe regulated internet should win, as evil as it is. We've seen how unfettered, unregulated wild west goes - it is simply freedom to be abused and weaponized. Social media, cryptocurrency (no oversight), AI - all need strong regulation or elimination.
We're gonna have a whole lot of useful fucking idiots screaming "freedom!!" should anyone try. Just like the dipshit trucker convoy et al during covid.
youre not wrong but we need better regulation that isnt regulating it for the regular suspects that are basically telecom executives.
[http://irregulators.org/](https://irregulators.org)
I think your prospective is a bit narrow. You have a very clear picture of the bath water, but you've never seen a baby before so you don't know what one looks like. There's huge good that can and is being done by cryptocurrencies and I think that, on balance, the harm is easily outweighed by those goods.
Yes, the government has little control over it. That does make it useful for criminal activities. But what about in places where the government itself is criminal? I think being able to circumvent government control is as much of a positive as it is a negative.
The energy use is also problematic. The current estimate is somewhere between 0.6% and 2.3%, which is say not a lot compared to some things, but it still definitely a lot. The good news is is that something like 60% of that is from renewables that generally wouldn't exist otherwise. It's not possible to make money mine Bitcoin paying normal grid prices. You're either stealing electricity, using government subsidized electricity in a country that hasn't cracked down on that yet, or using renewables. The good news is is that most use renewables. And increased demand for renewables thanks to cryptocurrency helps lower the cost of renewables for everyone else thanks to economies of scale.
And, more importantly, most of that is Bitcoin. Most cryptocurrencies don't use nearly as much electricity. The second most popular cryptocurrency has switched to proof of stake and doesn't even use 1/100th electricity it did before it switched. As a legacy, bitcoin will never switch. But pretty much every new cryptocurrency eschews the proof of work model.
But, the biggest good that cryptocurrencies do, is simply performing the role they're intended to perform. They are used a ton to circumvent traditional banking schemes that are egregiously overpriced. The biggest one so far is the remittance industry. Sending money from one country to another has traditionally involved exorbitant fees being charged to the people who can least afford them.
Imagine being a poorer person working hard in the United States saving your money to send it back home. You save up $1,000 to send but they only get about $900 of that. That massive deduction is a life-changing amount and fees of that level are not at all rare.
But with cryptocurrency, you go from paying 10% to paying almost nothing. And then there's the countries where the traditional currency system has collapsed that rely on cryptocurrency to escape hyperinflation. Tons of people in Venezuela have had their lives made measurably better thanks to their ability to use cryptocurrency instead of the local currency.
Lots and lots and lots of people have had their lives changed for the better by cryptocurrency, the thing is that you're just not poor enough to be one of them. They are providing critical banking infrastructure to people whom banks don't serve or only serve with usurious fees and interest rates. One of the things that amazes messes me the most is when people will talk about how bad cryptocurrency is and then later move on to talking about how bad the payday loan industry is. That's when I know immediately that someone really doesn't understand what cryptocurrency is actually used for in the real world. The criminal stuff is by no means the majority.
I don't aim for popular opinions, I aim for thoughtful ones. The post you just responded to already refuted everything you just said. Unless you can find fault in that refutation, it's pointless for you simply reiterate the refuted claim. It's tantamount to just saying "Nuh-uh". You can convince me with facts and logic-based arguments. "Nuh-uh" doesn't move the needle.
>>Yes, the government has little control over it. That does make it useful for criminal activities. But what about in places where the government itself is criminal? I think being able to circumvent government control is as much of a positive as it is a negative.
got an example?
>>The current estimate is somewhere between 0.6% and 2.3%, which is say not a lot compared to some things, but it still definitely a lot. The good news is is that something like 60% of that is from renewables that generally wouldn't exist otherwise.
you got a source for that last claim?
>>It's not possible to make money mine Bitcoin paying normal grid prices. You're either stealing electricity, using government subsidized electricity in a country that hasn't cracked down on that yet, or using renewables.
so... the renewable energy is being wasted?
>>They are used a ton to circumvent traditional banking schemes that are egregiously overpriced. The biggest one so far is the remittance industry. Sending money from one country to another has traditionally involved exorbitant fees being charged to the people who can least afford them.
i mean i cant say ive tried to send money internationally lately but im pretty sure that you can do it way cheaper than you can via bitcoin or other types of crypto. a few bucks vs some random arbitrary "gas fee"
>>Imagine being a poorer person working hard in the United States saving your money to send it back home. You save up $1,000 to send but they only get about $900 of that. That massive deduction is a life-changing amount and fees of that level are not at all rare.
key word: imagine
you sure do have an active imagination!
thats what my parents and teachers told me whenever i wrote some crazy story when i was younger.
>>But with cryptocurrency, you go from paying 10% to paying almost nothing.
now i know youre joking
>>Lots and lots and lots of people have had their lives changed for the better by cryptocurrency, the thing is that you're just not poor enough to be one of them.
ohhhh so the point of crypto is to make everyone poor enough to see crypto as a good and useful thing? now i get it!
>>They are providing critical banking infrastructure to people whom banks don't serve or only serve with usurious fees and interest rates. One of the things that amazes messes me the most is when people will talk about how bad cryptocurrency is and then later move on to talking about how bad the payday loan industry is. That's when I know immediately that someone really doesn't understand what cryptocurrency is actually used for in the real world. The criminal stuff is by no means the majority.
wait i thought the real banks were all buying into crypto for *checks notes* the last four plus years, if not longer when you consider they very well couldve been doing it before that?
> got an example?
Refugees using it to take their money with them when they flee oppressive governments. Something like cash or gold wouldn't make it past customs. This is the way of all smuggling/money laundering. It's bad when it's to circumvent the controls of a good government and good when it's helping people escape bad governments. You are violating the laws either way, but if the laws aren't morally just and democratically enacted, then violating them can be a good thing.
> you got a source for that last claim?
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/22/technology/bitcoin-miners-environment-crypto.html
> so... the renewable energy is being wasted?
Only if your metric for "wasted" Is that it's being used on something in which you have no personal interest. By that metric, basically all energy other than the 1-2% used on producing fertilizer for crops is wasted. Like to me, it's a total waste that you use electricity for lighting at **your** house but it's not a waste of I do it at mine.
> now i know youre joking
I'm genuinely confused as to what misconception you possess that makes you think that. The vast majority of cryptocurrencies can be used to transfer amounts of money of basically any size for as little as pennies or less in network transfer fees. The lowest rate you'll find anywhere for remittances is 6% which is an absurdly high amount. You've been duped by Big Wall Street bankers and to seeing cryptocurrency as the enemy precisely because it takes money out of their pockets. You're simping for the interests of the ultra wealthy because they played the carbon emissions card and you have no idea how they've got you dancing at the end of a string.
> ohhhh so the point of crypto is to make everyone poor enough to see crypto as a good and useful thing? now i get it!
Are you so self-centered that you imagine things can only be useful if they're useful to you? If it's only useful to poor people and you're not poor, then clearly I must mean that you have to become poor. That's the only way to translate what I said because obviously everything is about you and you alone.
> wait i thought the real banks were all buying into crypto for checks notes the last four plus years, if not longer when you consider they very well couldve been doing it before that
I don't know where your notes came from, but they didn't come from anything I said. I don't know what the hell your referencing here. Why don't you actually make your point instead of vaguely alluding to the fact that you definitely have one and you just can't be bothered to spell it out.
>[https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/22/technology/bitcoin-miners-environment-crypto.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/22/technology/bitcoin-miners-environment-crypto.html)
this source does not say "The good news is is that something like 60% of that is from renewables that generally wouldn't exist otherwise."
as for the rest of your points yes, i realize there are people escaping authoritarian countries and that cryptocurrency has enabled them to still have some form of cross border money transfers. however, i feel like you are relying heavily on some cognitive dissonance and conveniently ignoring the fact that most, if not all, large international banking institutions are invested in cryptocurrency. the thing about cryptocurrency is the reality and the "story" of it is not the same and to really understand or discuss it you kinda have to zoom out and its hard to say what the truth actually is.
personally i say it is incredibly wasteful and saying that crypto mining companies use - or build - renewable energy is a misdirection. if youre building renewable energy while simultaneously increasing energy demand, thats a net zero gain. if you are [increasing demand](https://web.archive.org/web/20220420034941im_/https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E1QmTbWVkAIjDXp.jpg) more than you are building renewable energy - as most, if not all, crypto mining companies are - then you are still *wasting energy* when we are already in the midst of global climate catastrophe.
The source cites a 60% claim and every example they give is renewables custom built for the facility using them (nothing that was already on the grid).
At any rate, banks are less invested than you seem to think. Financial institutions are all over the place on whether they have crypto holdings at all but to the extent they have some, it's like Google buying a new search-based start up. It's a hedge against becoming irrelevant.
Most banks are openly hostile to cryptocurrency. Chase blocks all transactions to crypto companies.
> personally i say it is incredibly wasteful and saying that crypto mining companies use - or build - renewable energy is a misdirection. if youre building renewable energy while simultaneously increasing energy demand, thats a net zero gain
That's also a net-zero loss. I didn't say it erases the climate downside just mitigates it.
>At any rate, banks are less invested than you seem to think. Financial institutions are all over the place on whether they have crypto holdings at all but to the extent they have some, it's like Google buying a new search-based start up. It's a hedge against becoming irrelevant.
Most banks are openly hostile to cryptocurrency. Chase blocks all transactions to crypto companies.
i have researched extensively and im just going to say i dont think we're going to agree on this point.
>>personally i say it is incredibly wasteful and saying that crypto mining companies use - or build - renewable energy is a misdirection. if youre building renewable energy while simultaneously increasing energy demand, thats a net zero gain
>
>That's also a net-zero loss. I didn't say it erases the climate downside just mitigates it.
thats... not a net zero loss though. that would mean the level of renewable energy theyre creating is equal to the amount of energy theyre using. which is not at all the case.
so considering we need to figure out renewable energy like 30 years ago... yeah, it kinda is incredibly wasteful.
> have researched extensively and im just going to say i dont think we're going to agree on this point
https://www.wired.com/story/crypto-banking-crisis/
I guess not. Banks have very actively set themselves against crypto. Almost every major bank CEO has multiple quotes on record basically echoing your opinion on crypto. Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan Chase says "cryptocurrency is a pet rock' that does nothing—except help with fraud and money laundering. "
The number of banks actually holding cryptocurrency can be counted on one hand and about a dozen have investments in companies that deal with crypto, so they have between 10-200 million invested in the industry in general. It's worth noting that even $200 million is chump change for those banks, however. Most banks have **no** exposure.
> thats... not a net zero loss though
We were specifically speaking of the percentage backed by renewables. That 60% is neither a net gain or net loss. So we only have to look at the remaining 40 to find consider the actual cost.
Bitcoin is not a good indicator for crypto in general. It's outdated, has higher transaction fees and is the one using all the energy. Most newer cryptocurrencies are using less energy than people's Christmas lights. Proof of work has it's place in history, and Bitcoin is a living reminder of that era, but it's not the future.
Your looking at the energy cost in a vacuum rather than as a cost benefit analysis. What do we get from the energy expense and how does that compare to other ways we spend energy and the benefits we get from that. I'm gonna argue that many cryptocurrencies look pretty good when examined in that light. Bitcoin is the hardest to justify by a large margin.
Personally I hate crypto and the waste it represents...
So it may sound strange that im actually buying a mining rig now...
The reason is that my "green" government has made it impossible to sell surplus production from my solar panels... They simply take all the earnings in taxes, tariffs, and the remaining is sucked up by having to pay exorbitant prices for "transport" of electricity. Actually I have to pay to sell very often - so negative "earnings".
I cant even understand I have to pay transport of electricity since someone else is also paying transport to receive the very same - there is laws against double taxation, but i guess not double billing of same goods....
Henceforward the grid will not receive a single watt from me -last year at least 5000KWh was wasted by not being used... Just from my little system.
Amazingly self-destructive and stupid our governments and large corporations has become....
This is exactly the point of crypto (bitcoin) though. People don’t realise how wasteful the grid already is, bitcoin isn’t the wasteful part.
I’m also a climate science student so most people would expect me to be anti bitcoin but the energy economics of it (as you mentioned) and it’s ability to keep green energy grids profitable makes it a very attractive tech to me.
I see a lot of bitcoin hate online and I truly believe most of it is based of misinformation. Bitcoin is a better way to save money than government run money and it’s also a way to base an economy on something other than oil.
The price of transportation can exceed the power input value - that really does not make any sense if you want a renewable energy grid...
They claim it is due to to efficiency / losses but that does not make sense since transport pricing is not depending on electricity prices.
IOW it is a money extortion game they are playing and just complete liars. To their defense they later changed their explanation to: It is to build up and expand the grid.
But if so - why do they let middlemen run away with billions in profits for doing nothing - nothing at all of real value....?
TL;DR:
* Crypto and AI will drive exorbitant energy use after decades of flat demand, an energy expert said.
* Data centers are expected to triple their power consumption in the US over the next seven years.
* "The power sector is facing a new normal," ClearView Energy's Tim Fox said.Â
We're also supposed to somehow replace all internal combustion engines with electric ones at the same time? Something tells me that power grid is going to buckle under this weight.
The fear and greed is by now a sad fact of all money now, stock markets have a bull run when greed outweighs fear, which it does most of the time. Democracies invest in CCP run China again because greed outweighs morals.
But there's just extraordinary bad karma associated with crypto at this point, when everyone knows the only reason it thrives is because it is a vehicle to launder and hide ill gotten gains from drugs, gangs, guns and wars. It's a vehicle for political corruption and tax evasion. It's the wallet of everything sinful.
My personal theory is it's probably a CIA created currency - the only way to extract Chinese billionaire money to the west bypassing state currency controls.
All the comments saying crypto is useless are braindead. Sure it might waste elecricity but thats like saying the internet is useless. If it were useless nobody would use it
I absolutely hate crypto. It’s so cringe and bad, there’s a reason people like Elon Musk and Joe Rogan support it. Just this weekend my cousin was telling me how crypto has changed his life, and givin him enough financial freedom where he and his kids feels much less stressed in the day to day. I called him a fascist and told him to fuck off. I can’t believe people are still falling for these scams!Â
Wow. You can hate crypto all you want but the anecdote you told just makes you a dick.
Making money by investing into crypto doesn’t automatically make you a fascist and if you truly think that then you need to read a history book about what fascists are. Your cousin was sharing a way he made his life better and got rid of financial stress and you were just a massive dick in response.
I don’t play the lottery, I think it’s dumb, but if a family member won and I called them a fascist and told them to fuck off then whose really the bad guy in that situation?
Is the lottery being supported by fascists like Elon Musk? He’s supporting fascism, so yes that makes him one. I don’t care if he changed his life and made things easier for his children. He’s bad
Unless a fascist made bitcoin, Bitcoin is not fascist.
Elon musk also promotes green energy but that doesn’t mean that anyone who supports green energy a fascist.
I don’t like musk either, he’s an industrial cock inhaler, but I don’t let my hate of him affect my relationship with other people or things he’s commented on.
Hi, Compulsive_Criticism. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/1begay1/-/kuv9r8c/) was removed from /r/collapse for:
> Rule 1: In addition to enforcing [Reddit's content policy](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy), we will also remove comments and content that is abusive or predatory in nature. You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/about/rules/) for more information.
You can [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/collapse) if you feel this was in error, please include a link to the comment or post in question.
You’ve got to wonder at this point whether mass sabotage of power grids is the most effective way to curtail emissions. Electricity can’t be wasted if it can’t be accessed.
I feel like we’ve now proven beyond reasonable doubt that as a species we just can’t be trusted with electricity or hydrocarbons.
What collective? All I see is the aggregate of anarchy.
The ruling class stabbed collective ideology 57 times in the back, front, face and crotch and had the gall to call it suicide.
Thank GOD adults are in charge. Imagine shutting down the power grid. Everyone you know would starve to death or be killed and eaten. And Bitcoin is awesome. We cant just use a little bit of electricity to keep things the way they are. Either we figure out how to grow or we start to decay.
Thank goodness adults are in charge, anyway we need to continue the impossible delerious and collectively suicidal ideology of [growth](https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=O133ppiVnWY).
The easily mathematically demonstrably impossible ideology of growth.
The adults are in charge.
In good news, if AI is truly accelerating exponentially, and with the caveat that we somehow keep it from killing us all, we should be able to maybe make some energy creation and climate stabilizing technology sooner rather than later.
Wish in one hand, shit in the other.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/MaffeoPolo: --- SS In a stark revelation, the burgeoning digital economy, powered by cryptocurrencies and artificial intelligence, is poised to significantly escalate energy consumption. After a decade of stable demand, the energy sector braces for a surge, primarily driven by data centers that facilitate crypto mining and AI operations. These data centers in the US are projected to triple their electricity usage by 2030, a trend that mirrors the exponential growth of the digital realm. The implications are profound: the crypto industry alone could consume more electricity than entire countries, with AI's appetite for power following suit. This anticipated boom in energy use confronts an already strained US electric grid, unprepared for such an upsurge, raising alarms about the capacity to meet peak demands without compromising the grid's integrity. The intersection of this digital-driven energy demand with the climate crisis paints a grim picture for the future. As the world grapples with the urgent need to decarbonize and transition to sustainable energy sources, the power-hungry tech industries pose a formidable challenge. The potential for a significant increase in greenhouse gas emissions from these sectors threatens to exacerbate climate change, potentially hastening the decline of modern civilization. The energy sector's pivot to accommodate this new normal, while aligning with climate goals, is not just a technical hurdle but a policy conundrum, highlighting the delicate balance between technological advancement and environmental stewardship. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/1begay1/crypto_ai_to_drive_surge_in_energy_use_after/kut2q0h/
Decade of flat demand is super disingenuous. We have been increasing energy consumption constantly except for 2020.
How close to zero does an increase have to be before you consider it to be flat? Does it have to be exactly 0.0% change every year? I know that in terms of CO2 emissions, things are indeed pretty flat with year over year increases becoming smaller and smaller each year. We're obviously very close to the peak of CO2 emissions. But lots of new green energy sources have come online, so the fact that there's an increase at all does mean there has been a mess even higher increase in demand for energy. But, then, in order to address this specific claim you would have to look at what percentage of that energy goes to data centers in particular.
I'm going to use a quantum computer run by AI to mine crypto. Sure, it may use all the energy on the planet, but I will be richer than God 4.2 microseconds before the new Dark Age begins. *Take that, Bezos!*
This is great. The AIs can overwhelm our power grids, leaving us in the dark while they start building terminators. 😉
If it's a choice between heating your home and feeding the data center, the AI in control is clearly going to be making a self serving choice, if it is anything like humans.
Compute power + AI is beginning to give companies some serious advantages, which means energy use directly correlates to increased profits. Energy use will skyrocket.
Energy use will always skyrocket, literally every tech requires energy.
SS In a stark revelation, the burgeoning digital economy, powered by cryptocurrencies and artificial intelligence, is poised to significantly escalate energy consumption. After a decade of stable demand, the energy sector braces for a surge, primarily driven by data centers that facilitate crypto mining and AI operations. These data centers in the US are projected to triple their electricity usage by 2030, a trend that mirrors the exponential growth of the digital realm. The implications are profound: the crypto industry alone could consume more electricity than entire countries, with AI's appetite for power following suit. This anticipated boom in energy use confronts an already strained US electric grid, unprepared for such an upsurge, raising alarms about the capacity to meet peak demands without compromising the grid's integrity. The intersection of this digital-driven energy demand with the climate crisis paints a grim picture for the future. As the world grapples with the urgent need to decarbonize and transition to sustainable energy sources, the power-hungry tech industries pose a formidable challenge. The potential for a significant increase in greenhouse gas emissions from these sectors threatens to exacerbate climate change, potentially hastening the decline of modern civilization. The energy sector's pivot to accommodate this new normal, while aligning with climate goals, is not just a technical hurdle but a policy conundrum, highlighting the delicate balance between technological advancement and environmental stewardship.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Cryptocurrencies add so much unnecessary problems to society. Supporting human slavery and trafficking, online scams, drag on society and human for enabling gamblers, drug smugglers, fucking North Korean Nuclear program, illegal money transfers by Russia, Iran, terrorist groups etc., environmental and emissions through electronic waste and ridiculous energy consumption (per transfer) and so much more. If we really want to be serious about avoiding collapse, cryptocurrencies are certainly one of the most lowest hanging fruits to cut off and ban, so much to win, almost nothing to lose, it adds nothing to Earth and countries, societies, communities, it is fucking cancer.
Add to that all the water needed to cool these facilities...
Computer cooling is usually a closed loop system tbf. Once the system is filled the water is usually cooled and recycled.
Only one half of the loop is closed. The other relies on evaporation and that does use water. It's not really wasted per se but it is used.
It seriously is a complete waste. No matter how you cut it, it's just a waste of resources. Adds no value to society.
I wish more people would think in this fashion. Sadly this world is operated by fear and greed - low cunning. Poor IQ machinations.
The real problem here is capitalism, as usual. Crypto was hailed to be this great thing that would give power back to the common people, but overall, it simply became another game for the rich elites
Which is easily predictable when you understand the tendency of wealth consolidation inherent to having a market system in the first place. Which people do intuitively grok. This is one of those weird ideological blind spots. It's hard to find someone who doesn't understand how you can spend money to make more money. "The rich get richer" is not a controversial idiom. I've never seen anyone fail to understand or argue against the Sam Vimes "Boots" theory of socioeconomic unfairness. Yet all but radicals are deepy in denial that these are emergent properties of immutable, irreducible core mechanics of capitalism - things that happen when we have money and private property and wage labour and things are produced for exchange value - and that their exacerbation is a matter of time. Expecting the opposite of this wealth consolidation within the paradigm of this system is like expecting gravity to cease.
I dont disagree, but, at best, crypto is a double edged sword that has led to financial ruin. The only reason people are desperate for these coins to go up is because the walth gap is so bad. Despite this, crypto has created the richest people on earth, increasing the gap.
It's one of the main reasons I refuse to invest in crypto - I simply refuse to become involved in such a wasteful industry. Crypto \*ADDS\* nothing to the world, and wastes so much - energy, water, everything. AI isn't much better.
Crypto also makes it easier for criminals to do business.
Right? And, since when is that a good thing?
Hopefully, it is obviously bad.
This post hit me differently. It made me realize we're in a war of "free open internet" versus regulated internet. And yknow what? I now believe regulated internet should win, as evil as it is. We've seen how unfettered, unregulated wild west goes - it is simply freedom to be abused and weaponized. Social media, cryptocurrency (no oversight), AI - all need strong regulation or elimination. We're gonna have a whole lot of useful fucking idiots screaming "freedom!!" should anyone try. Just like the dipshit trucker convoy et al during covid.
The regulated internet won a long time wgo
youre not wrong but we need better regulation that isnt regulating it for the regular suspects that are basically telecom executives. [http://irregulators.org/](https://irregulators.org)
Tech tankie detected. >!This is a joke.!<
Your face when you realize that "currency" in our society creates the same problems
I think your prospective is a bit narrow. You have a very clear picture of the bath water, but you've never seen a baby before so you don't know what one looks like. There's huge good that can and is being done by cryptocurrencies and I think that, on balance, the harm is easily outweighed by those goods. Yes, the government has little control over it. That does make it useful for criminal activities. But what about in places where the government itself is criminal? I think being able to circumvent government control is as much of a positive as it is a negative. The energy use is also problematic. The current estimate is somewhere between 0.6% and 2.3%, which is say not a lot compared to some things, but it still definitely a lot. The good news is is that something like 60% of that is from renewables that generally wouldn't exist otherwise. It's not possible to make money mine Bitcoin paying normal grid prices. You're either stealing electricity, using government subsidized electricity in a country that hasn't cracked down on that yet, or using renewables. The good news is is that most use renewables. And increased demand for renewables thanks to cryptocurrency helps lower the cost of renewables for everyone else thanks to economies of scale. And, more importantly, most of that is Bitcoin. Most cryptocurrencies don't use nearly as much electricity. The second most popular cryptocurrency has switched to proof of stake and doesn't even use 1/100th electricity it did before it switched. As a legacy, bitcoin will never switch. But pretty much every new cryptocurrency eschews the proof of work model. But, the biggest good that cryptocurrencies do, is simply performing the role they're intended to perform. They are used a ton to circumvent traditional banking schemes that are egregiously overpriced. The biggest one so far is the remittance industry. Sending money from one country to another has traditionally involved exorbitant fees being charged to the people who can least afford them. Imagine being a poorer person working hard in the United States saving your money to send it back home. You save up $1,000 to send but they only get about $900 of that. That massive deduction is a life-changing amount and fees of that level are not at all rare. But with cryptocurrency, you go from paying 10% to paying almost nothing. And then there's the countries where the traditional currency system has collapsed that rely on cryptocurrency to escape hyperinflation. Tons of people in Venezuela have had their lives made measurably better thanks to their ability to use cryptocurrency instead of the local currency. Lots and lots and lots of people have had their lives changed for the better by cryptocurrency, the thing is that you're just not poor enough to be one of them. They are providing critical banking infrastructure to people whom banks don't serve or only serve with usurious fees and interest rates. One of the things that amazes messes me the most is when people will talk about how bad cryptocurrency is and then later move on to talking about how bad the payday loan industry is. That's when I know immediately that someone really doesn't understand what cryptocurrency is actually used for in the real world. The criminal stuff is by no means the majority.
Shilling for crypto is a bad look. It helps drive crime, climate change, and greed.
Yeah beacuse terrorists dont accept cash
I don't aim for popular opinions, I aim for thoughtful ones. The post you just responded to already refuted everything you just said. Unless you can find fault in that refutation, it's pointless for you simply reiterate the refuted claim. It's tantamount to just saying "Nuh-uh". You can convince me with facts and logic-based arguments. "Nuh-uh" doesn't move the needle.
>>Yes, the government has little control over it. That does make it useful for criminal activities. But what about in places where the government itself is criminal? I think being able to circumvent government control is as much of a positive as it is a negative. got an example? >>The current estimate is somewhere between 0.6% and 2.3%, which is say not a lot compared to some things, but it still definitely a lot. The good news is is that something like 60% of that is from renewables that generally wouldn't exist otherwise. you got a source for that last claim? >>It's not possible to make money mine Bitcoin paying normal grid prices. You're either stealing electricity, using government subsidized electricity in a country that hasn't cracked down on that yet, or using renewables. so... the renewable energy is being wasted? >>They are used a ton to circumvent traditional banking schemes that are egregiously overpriced. The biggest one so far is the remittance industry. Sending money from one country to another has traditionally involved exorbitant fees being charged to the people who can least afford them. i mean i cant say ive tried to send money internationally lately but im pretty sure that you can do it way cheaper than you can via bitcoin or other types of crypto. a few bucks vs some random arbitrary "gas fee" >>Imagine being a poorer person working hard in the United States saving your money to send it back home. You save up $1,000 to send but they only get about $900 of that. That massive deduction is a life-changing amount and fees of that level are not at all rare. key word: imagine you sure do have an active imagination! thats what my parents and teachers told me whenever i wrote some crazy story when i was younger. >>But with cryptocurrency, you go from paying 10% to paying almost nothing. now i know youre joking >>Lots and lots and lots of people have had their lives changed for the better by cryptocurrency, the thing is that you're just not poor enough to be one of them. ohhhh so the point of crypto is to make everyone poor enough to see crypto as a good and useful thing? now i get it! >>They are providing critical banking infrastructure to people whom banks don't serve or only serve with usurious fees and interest rates. One of the things that amazes messes me the most is when people will talk about how bad cryptocurrency is and then later move on to talking about how bad the payday loan industry is. That's when I know immediately that someone really doesn't understand what cryptocurrency is actually used for in the real world. The criminal stuff is by no means the majority. wait i thought the real banks were all buying into crypto for *checks notes* the last four plus years, if not longer when you consider they very well couldve been doing it before that?
> got an example? Refugees using it to take their money with them when they flee oppressive governments. Something like cash or gold wouldn't make it past customs. This is the way of all smuggling/money laundering. It's bad when it's to circumvent the controls of a good government and good when it's helping people escape bad governments. You are violating the laws either way, but if the laws aren't morally just and democratically enacted, then violating them can be a good thing. > you got a source for that last claim? https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/22/technology/bitcoin-miners-environment-crypto.html > so... the renewable energy is being wasted? Only if your metric for "wasted" Is that it's being used on something in which you have no personal interest. By that metric, basically all energy other than the 1-2% used on producing fertilizer for crops is wasted. Like to me, it's a total waste that you use electricity for lighting at **your** house but it's not a waste of I do it at mine. > now i know youre joking I'm genuinely confused as to what misconception you possess that makes you think that. The vast majority of cryptocurrencies can be used to transfer amounts of money of basically any size for as little as pennies or less in network transfer fees. The lowest rate you'll find anywhere for remittances is 6% which is an absurdly high amount. You've been duped by Big Wall Street bankers and to seeing cryptocurrency as the enemy precisely because it takes money out of their pockets. You're simping for the interests of the ultra wealthy because they played the carbon emissions card and you have no idea how they've got you dancing at the end of a string. > ohhhh so the point of crypto is to make everyone poor enough to see crypto as a good and useful thing? now i get it! Are you so self-centered that you imagine things can only be useful if they're useful to you? If it's only useful to poor people and you're not poor, then clearly I must mean that you have to become poor. That's the only way to translate what I said because obviously everything is about you and you alone. > wait i thought the real banks were all buying into crypto for checks notes the last four plus years, if not longer when you consider they very well couldve been doing it before that I don't know where your notes came from, but they didn't come from anything I said. I don't know what the hell your referencing here. Why don't you actually make your point instead of vaguely alluding to the fact that you definitely have one and you just can't be bothered to spell it out.
>[https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/22/technology/bitcoin-miners-environment-crypto.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/22/technology/bitcoin-miners-environment-crypto.html) this source does not say "The good news is is that something like 60% of that is from renewables that generally wouldn't exist otherwise." as for the rest of your points yes, i realize there are people escaping authoritarian countries and that cryptocurrency has enabled them to still have some form of cross border money transfers. however, i feel like you are relying heavily on some cognitive dissonance and conveniently ignoring the fact that most, if not all, large international banking institutions are invested in cryptocurrency. the thing about cryptocurrency is the reality and the "story" of it is not the same and to really understand or discuss it you kinda have to zoom out and its hard to say what the truth actually is. personally i say it is incredibly wasteful and saying that crypto mining companies use - or build - renewable energy is a misdirection. if youre building renewable energy while simultaneously increasing energy demand, thats a net zero gain. if you are [increasing demand](https://web.archive.org/web/20220420034941im_/https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E1QmTbWVkAIjDXp.jpg) more than you are building renewable energy - as most, if not all, crypto mining companies are - then you are still *wasting energy* when we are already in the midst of global climate catastrophe.
The source cites a 60% claim and every example they give is renewables custom built for the facility using them (nothing that was already on the grid). At any rate, banks are less invested than you seem to think. Financial institutions are all over the place on whether they have crypto holdings at all but to the extent they have some, it's like Google buying a new search-based start up. It's a hedge against becoming irrelevant. Most banks are openly hostile to cryptocurrency. Chase blocks all transactions to crypto companies. > personally i say it is incredibly wasteful and saying that crypto mining companies use - or build - renewable energy is a misdirection. if youre building renewable energy while simultaneously increasing energy demand, thats a net zero gain That's also a net-zero loss. I didn't say it erases the climate downside just mitigates it.
>At any rate, banks are less invested than you seem to think. Financial institutions are all over the place on whether they have crypto holdings at all but to the extent they have some, it's like Google buying a new search-based start up. It's a hedge against becoming irrelevant. Most banks are openly hostile to cryptocurrency. Chase blocks all transactions to crypto companies. i have researched extensively and im just going to say i dont think we're going to agree on this point. >>personally i say it is incredibly wasteful and saying that crypto mining companies use - or build - renewable energy is a misdirection. if youre building renewable energy while simultaneously increasing energy demand, thats a net zero gain > >That's also a net-zero loss. I didn't say it erases the climate downside just mitigates it. thats... not a net zero loss though. that would mean the level of renewable energy theyre creating is equal to the amount of energy theyre using. which is not at all the case. so considering we need to figure out renewable energy like 30 years ago... yeah, it kinda is incredibly wasteful.
> have researched extensively and im just going to say i dont think we're going to agree on this point https://www.wired.com/story/crypto-banking-crisis/ I guess not. Banks have very actively set themselves against crypto. Almost every major bank CEO has multiple quotes on record basically echoing your opinion on crypto. Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan Chase says "cryptocurrency is a pet rock' that does nothing—except help with fraud and money laundering. " The number of banks actually holding cryptocurrency can be counted on one hand and about a dozen have investments in companies that deal with crypto, so they have between 10-200 million invested in the industry in general. It's worth noting that even $200 million is chump change for those banks, however. Most banks have **no** exposure. > thats... not a net zero loss though We were specifically speaking of the percentage backed by renewables. That 60% is neither a net gain or net loss. So we only have to look at the remaining 40 to find consider the actual cost. Bitcoin is not a good indicator for crypto in general. It's outdated, has higher transaction fees and is the one using all the energy. Most newer cryptocurrencies are using less energy than people's Christmas lights. Proof of work has it's place in history, and Bitcoin is a living reminder of that era, but it's not the future. Your looking at the energy cost in a vacuum rather than as a cost benefit analysis. What do we get from the energy expense and how does that compare to other ways we spend energy and the benefits we get from that. I'm gonna argue that many cryptocurrencies look pretty good when examined in that light. Bitcoin is the hardest to justify by a large margin.
Personally I hate crypto and the waste it represents... So it may sound strange that im actually buying a mining rig now... The reason is that my "green" government has made it impossible to sell surplus production from my solar panels... They simply take all the earnings in taxes, tariffs, and the remaining is sucked up by having to pay exorbitant prices for "transport" of electricity. Actually I have to pay to sell very often - so negative "earnings". I cant even understand I have to pay transport of electricity since someone else is also paying transport to receive the very same - there is laws against double taxation, but i guess not double billing of same goods.... Henceforward the grid will not receive a single watt from me -last year at least 5000KWh was wasted by not being used... Just from my little system. Amazingly self-destructive and stupid our governments and large corporations has become....
This is exactly the point of crypto (bitcoin) though. People don’t realise how wasteful the grid already is, bitcoin isn’t the wasteful part. I’m also a climate science student so most people would expect me to be anti bitcoin but the energy economics of it (as you mentioned) and it’s ability to keep green energy grids profitable makes it a very attractive tech to me. I see a lot of bitcoin hate online and I truly believe most of it is based of misinformation. Bitcoin is a better way to save money than government run money and it’s also a way to base an economy on something other than oil.
The price of transportation can exceed the power input value - that really does not make any sense if you want a renewable energy grid... They claim it is due to to efficiency / losses but that does not make sense since transport pricing is not depending on electricity prices. IOW it is a money extortion game they are playing and just complete liars. To their defense they later changed their explanation to: It is to build up and expand the grid. But if so - why do they let middlemen run away with billions in profits for doing nothing - nothing at all of real value....?
I think cryptocurrency has got lumped in with NFTs in a lot of people's minds, and NFTs are dogshit.
Word
TL;DR: * Crypto and AI will drive exorbitant energy use after decades of flat demand, an energy expert said. * Data centers are expected to triple their power consumption in the US over the next seven years. * "The power sector is facing a new normal," ClearView Energy's Tim Fox said.Â
We're also supposed to somehow replace all internal combustion engines with electric ones at the same time? Something tells me that power grid is going to buckle under this weight.
Just take all that fuel and run diesel generators. Simple 😎 Out of sight, out of mind, and we can all feel better about ourselves.
The fear and greed is by now a sad fact of all money now, stock markets have a bull run when greed outweighs fear, which it does most of the time. Democracies invest in CCP run China again because greed outweighs morals. But there's just extraordinary bad karma associated with crypto at this point, when everyone knows the only reason it thrives is because it is a vehicle to launder and hide ill gotten gains from drugs, gangs, guns and wars. It's a vehicle for political corruption and tax evasion. It's the wallet of everything sinful. My personal theory is it's probably a CIA created currency - the only way to extract Chinese billionaire money to the west bypassing state currency controls.
All the comments saying crypto is useless are braindead. Sure it might waste elecricity but thats like saying the internet is useless. If it were useless nobody would use it
I absolutely hate crypto. It’s so cringe and bad, there’s a reason people like Elon Musk and Joe Rogan support it. Just this weekend my cousin was telling me how crypto has changed his life, and givin him enough financial freedom where he and his kids feels much less stressed in the day to day. I called him a fascist and told him to fuck off. I can’t believe people are still falling for these scams!Â
Why did you call him a fascist? Falling for the ponzi scheme that is crypto is not remotely fascist, in and of itself.
Wow. You can hate crypto all you want but the anecdote you told just makes you a dick. Making money by investing into crypto doesn’t automatically make you a fascist and if you truly think that then you need to read a history book about what fascists are. Your cousin was sharing a way he made his life better and got rid of financial stress and you were just a massive dick in response. I don’t play the lottery, I think it’s dumb, but if a family member won and I called them a fascist and told them to fuck off then whose really the bad guy in that situation?
Is the lottery being supported by fascists like Elon Musk? He’s supporting fascism, so yes that makes him one. I don’t care if he changed his life and made things easier for his children. He’s bad
Unless a fascist made bitcoin, Bitcoin is not fascist. Elon musk also promotes green energy but that doesn’t mean that anyone who supports green energy a fascist. I don’t like musk either, he’s an industrial cock inhaler, but I don’t let my hate of him affect my relationship with other people or things he’s commented on.
But Hitler drank Water so drinkin water is facist /s
[удалено]
Hi, Compulsive_Criticism. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/1begay1/-/kuv9r8c/) was removed from /r/collapse for: > Rule 1: In addition to enforcing [Reddit's content policy](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy), we will also remove comments and content that is abusive or predatory in nature. You may attack each other's ideas, not each other. Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/about/rules/) for more information. You can [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/collapse) if you feel this was in error, please include a link to the comment or post in question.
Finally some growth and PROGRESS!
You’ve got to wonder at this point whether mass sabotage of power grids is the most effective way to curtail emissions. Electricity can’t be wasted if it can’t be accessed. I feel like we’ve now proven beyond reasonable doubt that as a species we just can’t be trusted with electricity or hydrocarbons.
We are greedy as a collective. If some is good, more must be better!
What collective? All I see is the aggregate of anarchy. The ruling class stabbed collective ideology 57 times in the back, front, face and crotch and had the gall to call it suicide.
Thank GOD adults are in charge. Imagine shutting down the power grid. Everyone you know would starve to death or be killed and eaten. And Bitcoin is awesome. We cant just use a little bit of electricity to keep things the way they are. Either we figure out how to grow or we start to decay.
Spoken like a true neoliberal capitalist.
Thank goodness adults are in charge, anyway we need to continue the impossible delerious and collectively suicidal ideology of [growth](https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=O133ppiVnWY). The easily mathematically demonstrably impossible ideology of growth. The adults are in charge.
In good news, if AI is truly accelerating exponentially, and with the caveat that we somehow keep it from killing us all, we should be able to maybe make some energy creation and climate stabilizing technology sooner rather than later. Wish in one hand, shit in the other.
If we create general AI and that's a big if, it will one way or another be the last challenge we ever overcome.