I may have miscalculated somewhere, but with 2.9GW per second consumption would already be ~25TWh/year, which would be around 0.1% of world energy consumption
I talked about this to @aantonop in in a @case_podcast episode, starting at 00:42:04: case-podcast.org/16-bitcoin There’s also a transcript if you don’t want to listen to the whole thing: look for the little icon in the lower right corner of the player (why can’t link to that, FFS?)
The first peer-reviewed study of bitcoin’s energy consumption confirms our fears:
Bitcoin’s energy consumption is growing at 20% *per month* and is effectively erasing decades of progress on renewable energy.
grist.org/article/bitcoins-e…
“The first peer-reviewed study” is apparently still written by the person who is the single source of this type of information, using a (to me) somewhat questionable method. Surely there must be lots of other people looking into this? Does anyone have additional sources?
The first peer-reviewed study of bitcoin’s energy consumption confirms our fears:
Bitcoin’s energy consumption is growing at 20% *per month* and is effectively erasing decades of progress on renewable energy.
grist.org/article/bitcoins-e…
Personally, I am still undecided whether or not this is something worth doing (one way or the other). I do note it’s basically just one person who is the source of basically all reports, but I also note a pretty deafening silence by the enthusiasts
An example would a big commercial ESB or EAI or DB product in the center, but the same is true for something like Kafka. I have no objections to using any of these, but not as the long-lived strategy for integration
If your top level architecture diagram includes a product name, even if it’s an open source product, chances are you’re missing something in terms of long-term stability