cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/105774

Dogecoin uses relatively little energy for transactions compared with some other cryptocurrencies (0.12 kilowatt-hours per transaction (kWh)).[79] In comparison, Bitcoin uses 707.6 kWh[80] and Ethereum uses 62.56 kWh

Doge coin much future woof

Arthur Besse
link
fedilink
1
edit-2
1M

such exuberant, very doge. wow.

Energy per transaction is a red herring; the energy consumption in an hour with zero transactions (mining empty blocks) is equal to an hour where the network is flooded with transactions and every block is full.

Dogecoin uses less energy overall than some other PoW blockchains because there is less hashpower mining it, because its current exchange value limits mining profitability. When the price of dogecoin increases, the amount of hashpower that is dedicated to mining it (and thus the network’s overall power consumption) also increases.

Less hashpower/energy also means less security (the cost of becoming 51% of the network to perform a double spending attack is much lower).

Oddly this site https://www.crypto51.app/ which shows the attack costs of various PoW blockchains doesn’t include dogecoin. I suspect this may be because its PoW system is non-standard, albeit “based on scrypt”, so maybe it is more complicated to determine the attack cost.

tldr: less popular PoW blockchains always use less energy than the more popular ones. this is not a good reason to advocate for their use, because they will use more energy if your advocacy is successful.

@Aless246
creator
link
fedilink
21M

Which cryptocurrency do you think is 1) green enough and 2) has potential for actual usage one day?

Arthur Besse
link
fedilink
1
edit-2
1M

I don’t know. In theory, replacing Proof-of-Work (where the security is defined by the amount of energy used) with Proof-of-Stake (where the security is defined by the amount of “value” “staked”) is a solution, but in practice there remain a lot of unsolved problems with that approach (which I don’t have time to dig in to at the moment).

@Aless246
creator
link
fedilink
11M

I’ve read a bit about proof of stake problems.

@Aless246
creator
link
fedilink
21M

Too complicated for me, if it costs say 1 kwh to do 1 transaction, why would it later cost 2 kwh for 1 transaction?

Arthur Besse
link
fedilink
11M

Because power usage and number of transactions are completely unrelated.

@Aless246
creator
link
fedilink
21M

Does anything else work like this as an example?

Like if walking up a staircase uses 1 cal of energy, walking up 2 staircase uses 2 cal

Arthur Besse
link
fedilink
1
edit-2
1M

Sure: imagine a building where the lights are always on. The electricity used by the lights is the same when the building is full of people as when it is empty.

(This analogy isn’t great though, because it doesn’t make sense to say that as a building becomes more and more popular it uses more and more energy despite not gaining any capacity - which is, believe it or not, how proof-of-work blockchains actually work.)

Arthur Besse
link
fedilink
1
edit-2
1M

I’m not sure if this will make it clearer, but, I’ll try to expand the analogy to cover how the energy use changes.

The building has a finite capacity for people who can simultaneously be inside, but it somehow magically has infinite space for more lights to be added. (Operating a light there does not require the operator of the light to be in the building.)

Entering the building requires the payment of a special token. A fixed number of these tokens are created by the building every day, and are granted by random lottery to people who are currently operating lights there. If you operate one light in the building, you get one lottery ticket per day; if you operate 10 lights you get 10 tickets per day. Tokens can be obtained either by participating in the lottery (by operating one or more lights), or by buying tokens from other people who have them.

As the market price of the tokens increases (due to increased demand from people who want buy them, either because they want to be able to spend them to go inside, or, as an investment), more people will decide to place more lights inside and supply electricity for them to operate continuously (so that they have a chance at winning tokens each day).

Crucially, increasing or decreasing the amount of lighting does not change the number of tokens issued or the number of people who can be inside at the same time. It does change the number of lottery tickets issued each day, though, as 1 light = 1 ticket.

In case it isn’t clear, the people in the building are analogous to transactions being included in a block, the people operating the lights are analogous to miners, and the number of lottery tickets issued each day is analogous to the mining difficulty.

HTH.

@Aless246
creator
link
fedilink
11M

Thanks for the good explanation! Have one of my lemmy bucks!

https://lemmy.ca/post/115031

https://lemmy.ml/c/lemmybucks

deleted by creator

  • 0 users online
  • 1 user / day
  • 1 user / week
  • 6 users / month
  • 19 users / 6 months
  • 5 subscribers
  • 105 Posts
  • 120 Comments
  • Modlog