How is someone mining on GPUs they bought themselves infringing on your freedom, pray tell?
And I'd actually like to see a study on the positive mental health benefit of gaming, because I'm skeptical.
Also the idea that you need a primo GPU in order to game is a bit silly. And if you're the kind of person that absolutely needs the best graphics in order to enjoy gaming, please see my point no. 2 about mental health.
The issue isn't the "we're using renewable energy - see, this doesn't make things worse." It also doesn't make things better. Whats more, its increasing the consumption of energy which is at the core of the problem.
It would have been even better to push that renewable energy out onto the grid (and also not increase the consumption of power for crypto mining).
Switching all new power consumption to renewable doesn't improve things because the baseline of non-renewable is still there. We need to reduce existing and switch existing to renewable.
I suspect a bit of Parkinson's law is in place with energy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law -- The key is to stop making it worse (by mining crypto and trying to justify it with "but its from renewable").
How is consuming energy a problem? There is a blob of infinite energy on the sky and practically all of it is wasted.
The 3000 series gpus are the most efficient hashes/watt. So actually by disabling this, you are driving people towards less efficient/worse for the environment ASICS machines.
Yes I batteried my home, and use my solar on everything I can first... there is still excess... especially at peak.
Pretty sure this dismantled most of your argument.
They are increasing this tax as well shortly... so it will get better.
The gpus are good exactly because they are efficient but if you didn’t care about power consumption, ASICS are more profitable (in terms of cost of setup vs return from mining).
The primary reason I went with gpus, is because I can shut them off based on solar excess in 100w increments. So if I’m 200w in excess, turn 2 cards on. 300w - 3 cards etc.
Ofcourse I totally understand you do as you do, on an individual basis, but that just stresses the point that this can only be regulated at the group/population level.
I don’t see anything I’m doing as a wrong. Literally just wasted energy... why not convert it to $?
> In the old days, when power companies were the only generators in town, control devices like regulators, capacitors or relays were designed to assume that power flowed in only one direction. “If they saw power flowing in the other direction, they typically tripped or misbehaved, causing customer outages or power quality issues,” Kuloor says. This tendency has prompted many utilities to update such equipment with reverse-power-flow logic or, in the case of mechanical devices that have no software, replace devices altogether.
Not all local grids are prepared for that.
Additionally, there's the signaling of power supply that generators do between each other.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility_frequency#Frequency_an...
https://solarbuildermag.com/policy/grid-saturation-lessons-f...
The different parts of the grid will use fluctuations in the frequency of the grid to indicate if they've got too much power, or can't supply enough.
This can get more complicated with single house putting power back in that they're matching the frequency, but not controlling it as such. If there is too much supply from single house sources, it can cause the frequency of the grid to vary too much and potentially damage the power plant generators.
When this becomes exaggerated - all the houses start producing more power because the sun came out (or the opposite that it clouds over), this can increase the costs for power.
You've also got the Hawaii problem. The Hawaii grid doesn't have the luxury of shipping its power to the next state over.
https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2020/02/05/how-to-solve-hawaiis-...
https://www.hakaimagazine.com/features/the-hot-mess-of-hawai...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_Hawaii
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/plugged-in/3-reasons-ha...
There are times when the rooftop solar in Hawaii exceeded the total demand for power. This meant there was too much power in the wires and that generators needed to shut down (or get into problems with pollution and inefficient combustion).
> The grid can only accept as much power as the island is consuming. Juario must mix and match different sized generators to balance what solar rooftops are producing while ensuring that the generators have enough “spinning reserve”—room to throttle up and down to handle those grid surprises. The Maui Electric chief operator must also keep the generators running hot to prevent inefficient combustion from sending dirtier exhaust up the stacks and violating the air quality rules that protect residents’ health.
https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/can-smarter-sola... has a neat map. There were sections of Hawaii where solar was supplying 250% of the demand in that area.
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/11/30/178686... is another useful bit to read. "electrical grid oversupply" is the term to search.
(Also no idea all the gadgets in-between house and generators, but assuming all the gadgets can handle load going in and out)
And there are other approaches to power storage. Thermal power storage is popular / useful with large solar installations. Hydro dams associated with a reservoir often have pumped storage where they can pump water back into the reservoir and then use it when its needed.
The signaling and frequency matching is still an issue.
I recall a company I worked at in California had two sets of generators. They had a diesel emergency generator for the data center and also a set of natural gas generators to cut down on power costs (when the price went high). The issue with the natural gas ones is that they needed something else to provide the utility frequency, something about them not being stable/consistent on their own.
Rooftop systems have the possibility / likelihood of also destabilizing the frequency in the grid. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rooftop_photovoltaic_power_sta...
> An electrical power system containing a 10% contribution from PV stations would require a 2.5% increase in load frequency control (LFC) capacity over a conventional system an issue which may be countered by using synchronverters in the DC/AC-circuit of the PV system. The break-even cost for PV power generation was in 1996 found to be relatively high for contribution levels of less than 10%. While higher proportions of PV power generation give lower break-even costs, economic and LFC considerations impose an upper limit of about 10% on PV contributions to the overall power systems.
There's a reference to that at https://www.worldcat.org/title/ieee-transactions-on-energy-c... - which I don't have access to to quote from.
The key point to this is that if solar power is increased, then the grid as a whole needs to also increase its power to get back in control of the load frequency. That is likely what you're seeing. By itself, this storage isn't sufficient for answering that issue. Ideally, the solar systems would have their own local batteries and respond as part of a smart grid to contribute according to the load frequency. ... But that costs more money for the installation and consumers are hesitant to do that.
https://www.energy-storage.news/news/tesla-powerwalls-hooked...
https://www.provisionsolar.com/general/grid-outages-and-the-...
Thanks for the thoughtful reply!
Twenty, thirty years ago the amount of power from rooftop installations being pushed out onto the grid was minimal compared to the size of the grid and it wasn't an issue.
If you had an energy producer that was producing 10% of the power and doing significant swings in its production without participating on the wholesale energy market (and not signaling those swings)... the regulators would have shut them down.
But when you've got 10,000 people each contributing 0.001% of the grid power (and all having the same swings)... and not participating on the wholesale market and not signaling their swings, that can be disruptive (and damaging).
https://learn.pjm.com/electricity-basics/market-for-electric... is also a good read and https://www.pjm.com/markets-and-operations.aspx is the live market for that part of the grid.
The person I was replying to said that mining was destroying the planet. This doesn't seem particularly true to me if you're mining on renewables.
If one wants to mine crypto, then do it as cheaply as possible instead. It really doesn't matter what the source of energy is. The entire system of crypto mining is inherently about who can use the energy the cheapest. Whats more, if someone gets energy cheaper it forces others to consume more power too.
If crypto is mined, it really doesn't matter what it uses power it - mining crypto is still increased consumption of power. Someone else is going to have to use non-green energy to do whatever they're going to do.
Energy production is not zero-sum with some fixed amount of non-renewables.
If I install solar on my house, I'm not forcing anyone else to use non-renewables. If I then use that solar to mine crypto, I'm... still not forcing anyone to use more non-renewables.
Mining and gaming aren't even close to comparable in power usage.
Because if you think the above behavior isn't "earning income" clearly better than "play video games", then your argument falls completely flat.
https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/programs/geh/geh_newslett...
It's a very accurate comparison.
Profitability doesn't go down considerably with other cryptos that are efficient on 30 series cards: https://whattomine.com/coins?aq_380=0&aq_fury=0&aq_470=0&aq_... (see the 'Rev. $ Profit' column)
I don't think either view is absolutely correct after having lived in a few different' societies - but there are valid points to support a view where individual freedom to act isn't the primary freedom to protect (i.e. protecting the freedom for everyone to live a healthy life better enables all individuals to achieve a greater degree of freedom as a society than being individually focused).
I really think there's a philosophical disagreement on what freedom is at the core of a lot of the libertarian vs. socialist arguments.