Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This is silly:

"Comparing Bitcoin’s energy consumption to other payment systems

To put the energy consumed by the Bitcoin network into perspective we can compare it to another payment system like VISA for example. Even though the available information on VISA’s energy consumption is limited, we can establish that the data centers that process VISA’s transactions consume energy equal to that of 50,000 U.S. households. We also know VISA processed 82.3 billion transactions in 2016. With the help of these numbers, it is possible to compare both networks and show that Bitcoin is extremely more energy intensive per transaction than VISA."

1. I have read that with every VISA transaction, transactions move between no less than 5 separate institutions. What is the net energy used in all of that deliberate inefficiency? All buildings, vehicles, and energy use of people who work for VISA must also be taken into account. And for all other credit cards and payment systems.

2. Bitcoin isn't really a "payment system", so comparing it to VISA is apples to oranges. It is more of a store of value, like a bank. So it would more properly be compared to the net electricity consumption of all banks, including all buildings, armoured trucks and all vehicles used to ship people to and from banks around the world.




Banks offer many services in addition to secure and insured deposits. The same cannot be said for wallet software made by anonymous internet devs with a lower barrier to implant obfuscated back doors to steal user funds irreversibly.

Bitcoin is in a competitive market so energy usage will be more relevant to compare against the decentralized services offering identical functionality with alternative algorithms, like litecoin, monereo, ethereum, and so on.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: