Fair point. All I was trying to show was that currencies like the Euro or USD has greater than zero energy usage to create/distribute.
I don't think BTC will stay the top crypto if it cannot resolve its current issues (though new ones will come after). Articles like takes stance, whether they know it or not, of this is here to stay for a long time and we need to deal with the ramifications. If that is true, more people are going to work on solving this issue either, or all of, through energy regulation, better hardware, better renewable energy, mass adoption of different coins, or moving to POS (or anything other proof system) instead of POW.
> Fair point. All I was trying to show was that currencies like the Euro or USD has greater than zero energy usage to create/distribute.
How many cash transactions occur in the world in 1 year? The number must be over 7 trillions assuming average person on this planet makes 1,000 cash transactions per year.
Now, let's divide 1 TWh by 7 trillions, we will get 0.14 Wh per cash transaction which is equivalent of having 60W light bulb switched on for about 8 seconds.
Considering one Bitcoin transaction currently consumes 345 kWh of electricity. That's equivalent of having 60W light bulb switched on for about 8 months.
So yeah, technically you are right. 8 seconds is not zero. But it's hell of a less than 8 months.
I don't think BTC will stay the top crypto if it cannot resolve its current issues (though new ones will come after). Articles like takes stance, whether they know it or not, of this is here to stay for a long time and we need to deal with the ramifications. If that is true, more people are going to work on solving this issue either, or all of, through energy regulation, better hardware, better renewable energy, mass adoption of different coins, or moving to POS (or anything other proof system) instead of POW.