this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2024
119 points (81.8% liked)

Technology

73758 readers
4113 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
119
Because AI and Crypto use so much electricity, what if a law was made that they had to power it with green energy? (lemmy.zip)
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by therealjcdenton@lemmy.zip to c/technology@lemmy.world
70 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Something on the lines of if your company facility is using over X amount of energy the majority of that has to be from a green source such as solar power. What would happen and is this feasible or am I totally thinking about this wrong

Edit: Good responses from everyone, my point in asking this was completely hypothetical, ignoring how hard it would be to implement a restriction. My own thoughts are that requiring the use of renewable energy for high electricity products could help spur the demand for it as now it's a requirement. Of course companies would fight back, they want money

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] tristan@aussie.zone 21 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (7 children)

Just to expand on this, While eth is 99.99% less energy use than Bitcoin, it still added 2.8 kilotonnes of co2 last year which is equal to about 2000 average houses for a year.

It's a negligible amount in the scheme of things, but a lot for a virtual currency especially when you add up all the various cryptocurrencies out there.

It wouldn't hurt to make all the POS ones use green energy, but probably wouldn't impact anything by itself.

Changing Bitcoin to green energy alone probably would however.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 13 points 2 years ago (6 children)

Why is it "a lot for a virtual currency?" What's the typical energy usage of a virtual currency?

In 2019 Visa used 740,000 gigajoules of energy, which is equivalent to 6727 households (google dug up a figure of 110 Gj/year for that). So this really doesn't seem like a lot for this kind of thing.

[–] Repelle@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (3 children)

By your estimate, visa used 3.4x the power of eth. I would guess visa handles much much more than 3.4x the volume of currency transactions and is way more efficient on energy.

[–] tristan@aussie.zone 9 points 2 years ago

Ethereum did approximately 1.1m transactions a day. Visa did approximately 660m a day.

Small difference lol

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)