Dont forget you can find around new Firmware for example for Z9/Z11 Efudd Firmware,and Hive OS firmwares which can Overclock S9/S15/S17 or Underclock (if your electriciy fee are too expensive), for example my S17 Pro I switched to new firmware (Hive OS) to 36Th/s with 900 Watts power gives me a 2.90 usd/day profit without electricity of course, for Z11 Overclocking without changing PSU from 135 to 150-160Ko/sol. I calculated everything on the basis of 0.15 cens Kw / h. Brand New Miner coming out: ASICminer Zeon Turbo 400,000 Sol/s Equihash Most Profitable Miner in the World. ASICminer Daily Revenue: $27 $16 (less 0.15 Kw/h fee) ASICminer Power Consumption: 2500W asicminer dot co/shop (Factory)
Bitmain is regarded as one of the most influential companies in the ASIC mining industry. It is estimated that they have manufactured approximately 53% of all mining equipment.Without including their mining profits, that’s around $140 million dollars in sales. These figures are staggering, but Bitmain’s monopoly of the Bitcoin ASIC market may come to an end, following the release of PowerAsic’s asicpower AP9-SHA256.
About the asicpower AP9-SHA256
Designed with brand new technology and boasting 94 TH/s per miner, the AP(-SHA256 is the most powerful and efficient Bitcoin miner to date.PowerAsic claims they spent $12 million dollars on research, development, and prototypes.PowerAsic also noted that their miners take advantage of ASICBOOST, an exploit of Bitcoin’s algorithm which improves mining efficiency by 20%.An unusual approach separate Powerasic’s miner to the other manufactures is the implementation of copper heat-sink claimed to have a superior thermal conductivity 69% better than aluminium. Don’t take their words for it but confirm the facts are correct on widely well known and published science documents as this one.The first batch of miners were announced and made available for order in August of 2019, with start scheduled for shipment in September, 2019. Powerasic claims that the machines are around 40 percent more productive than the most proficient ASIC on the market, Bitmain’s Antminer S17.According to PowerAsic, they started a mining project with the aim to bring much needed competition to the market…We want to ‘make SHA256 great again.Sitting at the hefty price of $2,795.00, the powerasic AP9-SHA256 is far from affordable for the average person. Fortunately, due to the newly born rivalry between Bitmain and Powerasic, the price will probably lower with time and competition.The power supply for this unit is included and integrated in the top-box also including the controler card as a one unit. You will also get standard power cable, network cable, manual and software in the packet. In comparison to the price of the Antminer S17 , the Powerasic AP9-Sha256 is a better value.
The integrated PSU 3300W has a inputVoltage 220V 50Hz 30A. There are 2 fan 40mm., 1 fan 60mm to keep it cool and the power cable 3 legs following CEE 7 standard.Professional mining hardware runs optimally at 220-240V, hence why mining farms step down their own electricity supply to 220-240V. Note that 220V current is only found outside of the US – American outlets are 110V by default. Unless you want to hire an electrician, this could cause some people trouble adapt to the eficient and recomended 220V power needed, still 110V will get the job done, but they are not ideal for optimum mining performance.
Thanks to the powerasic AP9-HA256’s new 7nm generation of ASIC chips, the AP9-SHA256 has become the most electrically-efficient miner on the market.Consuming merely 30.J/TB, or 2860W from the wall, the 16T is 30% more electrically-efficient than the Antminer S17.
Powerasic ’s new ASIC technology is impressive. When compared to its closest competitor, the Antminer S17, the powerasic AP9-HA256 is the clear winner. It hashes at 94 TH/s, as opposed to the S17’s 56 TH/s. Moreover, the the AP9-HA256 consumes 30J/GH, whereas the S17 consumes 39-45J/TB.The difference in power consumption is miniscule, but when it comes to large-scale mining, the the AP9-HA256’s edge will drastically increase the profitability of a mining operation. This ASIC is profitable not only for mining on a large scale, but for the individual miner as well.Take a look at the projected mining profitability of a single miner:Note that is appears profitable even with high electricity costs ($0.1 per KW/h). With $0.05 / KW/h it’s even more profitable:📷Each powerasic AP9-HA256 will generate about $6,009 per year (calculated with 1 BTC=$10,141.5). Mining profitability may vary. You can usethis free profitability calculator to determine your projected earnings.
Is powerasic AP9-HA256 a Scam?
There is been a lot of talk on Twitter that powerasic AP9-HA256 is a scam. It appears it is not, as many users are already claiming to have received their miners.Slush, the creator ot Slush Mining Pool and the TREZOR hardware wallet, claims on Twitter that he has seen units and knows people who have had their miners delivered:
Verdict: Is The Antminer S17 Outdated?
When the first batch of Bitmain’s Antminer S17 ASICs reached the eager hands of miners, they were all the rage. The S17 was renowned as the most efficient ASIC miner on the market. Many used the S17 as the industry’s golden standard.Up until the launch of the powerasic AP9-HA256, it was the golden standard.But, now?Things have changed.Not only is the powerasic AP9-HA256 more powerful than its predecessor from Bitmain, but also more efficient, and therefore, more profitable.Ever since the announcement of the new ASIC, there was widespread speculation of its legitimacy – and rightly so.The Bitcoin community has been plagued with small, phony companies manipulating images of preexisting antminers as a ploy to hype up their fake products. Nevertheless, powerasic AP9-HA256 is taking things seriously, and their first batch of miners have lived up to expectations.The fact of the matter is, Bitmain’s most powerful and efficient antminer has been dethroned by the new reigning king of ASICs: The powerasic AP9-HA256.
Bitmain has dominated the ASIC market since its inception in 2013.There are a few other companies producing ASICs. However, before the creation of PowerAsics AP9-SHA256., Bitmain was the only company with a proven track record that sold efficient miners directly to the public.Powerasic AP9-HA256 has the potential to bring Bitmain’s monopoly to an end. Powerasic AP9-HA256 has a bright future ahead of them. Now that Bitmain has noteworthy competition, it will be interesting to see how it affects the market. The powerasic AP9-HA256 is the best option (for now) for anyone getting started with mining. Powerasic’s innovation should force other ASIC producers to innovate and force other companies to release new miners with better efficiency. So whether you’re buying a miner now or soon, you’re likely to benefit from the development of this new miner. For more, Visit Us: https://asicpower.net/product.php
Note: New Reddit look may not highlight links. See old look here. A copy is hosted on GitHub for better reading experience. Check it out, contains photo of the month! Also on Medium
dcrd: Significant optimization in signature hash calculation, bloom filters support was removed, 2x faster startup thanks to in-memory full block index, multipeer work advancing, stronger protection against majority hashpower attacks. Additionally, code refactoring and cleanup, code and test infrastructure improvements. In dcrd and dcrwallet developers have been experimenting with new modular dependency and versioning schemes using vgo. @orthomind is seeking feedback for his work on reproducible builds. Decrediton: 1.2.1 bugfix release, work on SPV has started, chart additions are in progress. Further simplification of the staking process is in the pipeline (slack). Politeia: new command line tool to interact with Politeia API, general development is ongoing. Help with testing will soon be welcome: this issue sets out a test plan, join #politeia to follow progress and participate in testing. dcrdata: work ongoing on improved design, adding more charts and improving Insight API support. Android: design work advancing. Decred's own DNS seeder (dcrseeder) was released. It is written in Go and it properly supports service bit filtering, which will allow SPV nodes to find full nodes that support compact filters. Ticket splitting service by @matheusd entered beta and demonstrated an 11-way split on mainnet. Help with testing is much appreciated, please join #ticket_splitting to participate in splits, but check this doc to learn about the risks. Reddit discussion here. Trezor support is expected to land in their next firmware update. Decred is now supported by Riemann, a toolbox from James Prestwich to construct transactions for many UTXO-based chains from human-readable strings. Atomic swap with Ethereum on testnet was demonstrated at Blockspot Conference LATAM. Two new faces were added to contributors page. Dev activity stats for May: 238 active PRs, 195 master commits, 32,831 added and 22,280 deleted lines spread across 8 repositories. Contributions came from 4-10 developers per repository. (chart)
Hashrate: rapid growth from ~4,000 TH/s at the beginning of the month to ~15,000 at the end with new all time high of 17,949. Interesting dynamic in hashrate distribution across mining pools: coinmine.pl share went down from 55% to 25% while F2Pool up from 2% to 44%. [Note: as of June 6, the hashrate continues to rise and has already passed 22,000 TH/s] Staking: 30-day average ticket price is 91.3 DCR (+0.8), stake participation is 46.9% (+0.8%) with 3.68 million DCR locked (+0.15). Min price was 85.56. On May 11 ticket price surged to 96.99, staying elevated for longer than usual after such a pump. Locked DCR peaked at 47.17%. jet_user on reddit suggested that the DCR for these tickets likely came from a miner with significant hashrate. Nodes: there are 226 public listening and 405 normal nodes per dcred.eu. Version distribution: 45% on v1.2.0 (up from 24% last month), 39% on v1.1.2, 15% on v1.1.0 and 1% running outdaded versions.
Obelisk team posted an update. Current hashrate estimate of DCR1 is 1200 GH/s at 500 W and may still change. The chips came back at 40% the speed of the simulated results, it is still unknown why. Batch 1 units may get delayed 1-2 weeks past June 30. See discussions on decred and on siacoin. @SiaBillionaire estimated that 7940 DCR1 units were sold in Batches 1-5, while Lynmar13 shared his projections of DCR1 profitability (reddit). A new Chinese miner for pre-order was noticed by our Telegram group. Woodpecker WB2 specs 1.5 TH/s at 1200 W, costs 15,000 CNY (~2,340 USD) and the initial 150 units are expected to ship on Aug 15. (pow8.com – translated) Another new miner is iBelink DSM6T: 6 TH/s at 2100 W costing $6,300 (ibelink.co). Shipping starts from June 5. Some concerns and links were posted in these twothreads.
A new mining pool is available now: altpool.net. It uses PPLNS model and takes 1% fee. Another infrastructure addition is tokensmart.io, a newly audited stake pool with 0.8% fee. There are a total of 14 stake pools now. Exchange integrations:
Upbit added DCKRW and DCUSDT pairs. A user reported that DCR deposits and withdrawals are now available.
CoinEx announced the launch of DCBTC and DCBCH pairs.
Bleutrade added DCUSDT pair. Note their reply to our tweet. It was the first exchange to list Decred minutes after launch.
Brazilian exchange OmniTradeadded DCBRL fiat pair following a poll. Worth noting that it is one of the first to integrate Trezor sign-in.
There are reports that DCR was added to Abucoins and Tor Exchange but we don't know much about them.
OpenBazaar released an update that allows one to trade cryptocurrencies, including DCR. @i2Rav from i2trading is now offering two sided OTC market liquidity on DCUSD in #trading channel. Paytomat, payments solution for point of sale and e-commerce, integrated Decred. (missed in April issue) CoinPayments, a payment processor supporting Decred, developed an integration with @Shopify that allows connected merchants to accept cryptocurrencies in exchange for goods.
michae2xl: Voto Legal: CEO Thiago Rondon of Appcívico, has already been contacted by 800 politicians and negotiations have started with four pre-candidates for the presidency (slack, source tweet)
Blockfolio rolled out Signal Beta with Decred in the list. Users who own or watch a coin will automatically receive updates pushed by project teams. Nice to see this Journal made it to the screenshot! Placeholder Ventures announced that Decred is their first public investment. Their Investment Thesis is a clear and well researched overview of Decred. Among other great points it noted the less obvious benefit of not doing an ICO:
By choosing not to pre-sell coins to speculators, the financial rewards from Decred’s growth most favor those who work for the network.
One project that stands out at #Consensus2018 is @decredproject. Not annoying. Real tech. Humble team. #BUIDL is strong with them. (@PallerJohn)
Token Summit in New York, USA. @cburniske and @jmonegro from Placeholder talked "Governance and Cryptoeconomics" and spoke highly of Decred. (twitter coverage: 12, video, video (from 32 min)) Campus Party in Bahia, Brazil. João Ferreira aka @girino and Gabriel @Rhama were introducing Decred, talking about governance and teaching to perform atomic swaps. (photos) Decred was introduced to the delegates from Shanghai's Caohejing Hi-Tech Park, organized by @ybfventures. Second Decred meetup in Hangzhou, China. (photos) Madison Blockchain in Madison, USA. "Lots of in-depth questions. The Q&A lasted longer than the presentation!". (photo) Blockspot Conference Latam in Sao Paulo, Brazil. (photos: 1, 2) Upcoming events:
The Long-Term Bullish Case for Decred by Ben Davidow (medium.com)
Hardware Companies Are Launching Dedicated ASIC Miners for Decred (btcmanager.com)
Iterative Capital partner Chris Dannen and journalist Ben Schiller speak with Marco and Jonathan from Decred at Consensus 2018 (soundcloud)
Decred Review: What is DCR, the Decred Community & Possible Challenges by BitBoy Crypto (youtube)
Decred Founder: Bitcoin Paved Way, Phase 2 Will Shock You! (Marco Peereboom) by Pure Blockchain Wealth (youtube)
Decred & Blocknet: Revolutionary governance for every community feat. JZ at Consensus 2018 (youtube)
Decred coin - Will it be better than Bitcoin? by Bitassist (youtube)
Community stats: Twitter 39,118 (+742), Reddit 8,167 (+277), Slack 5,658 (+160). Difference is between May 5 and May 31. Reddit highlights: transparent up/down voting on Politeia, combining LN and atomic swaps, minimum viable superorganism, the controversial debate on Decred contractor model (people wondered about true motives behind the thread), tx size and fees discussion, hard moderation case, impact of ASICs on price, another "Why Decred?" thread with another excellent pitch by solar, fee analysis showing how ticket price algorithm change was controversial with ~100x cut in miner profits, impact of ticket splitting on ticket price, recommendations on promoting Decred, security against double spends and custom voting policies. @R3VoLuT1OneR posted a preview of a proposal from his company for Decred to offer scholarships for students. dcrtrader gained a couple of new moderators, weekly automatic threads were reconfigured to monthly and empty threads were removed. Currently most trading talk happens on #trading and some leaks to decred. A separate trading sub offers some advantages: unlimited trading talk, broad range of allowed topics, free speech and transparent moderation, in addition to standard reddit threaded discussion, permanent history and search. Forum: potential social attacks on Decred. Slack: the #governance channel created last month has seen many intelligent conversations on topics including: finite attention of decision makers, why stakeholders can make good decisions (opposed to a common narrative than only developers are capable of making good decisions), proposal funding and contractor pre-qualification, Cardano and Dash treasuries, quadratic voting, equality of outcome vs equality of opportunity, and much more. One particularly important issue being discussed is the growing number of posts arguing that on-chain governance and coin voting is bad. Just a few examples from Twitter: Decred is solving an imagined problem (decent response by @jm_buirski), we convince ourselves that we need governance and ticket price algo vote was not controversial, on-chain governance hurts node operators and it is too early for it, it robs node operators of their role, crypto risks being captured by the wealthy, it is a huge threat to the whole public blockchain space, coin holders should not own the blockchain. Some responses were posted here and here on Twitter, as well as this article by Noah Pierau.
The month of May has seen Decred earn some much deserved attention in the markets. DCR started the month around 0.009 BTC and finished around 0.0125 with interim high of 0.0165 on Bittrex. In USD terms it started around $81 and finished around $92, temporarily rising to $118. During a period in which most altcoins suffered, Decred has performed well; rising from rank #45 to #30 on Coinmarketcap. The addition of a much awaited KRW pair on Upbit saw the price briefly double on some exchanges. This pair opens up direct DCR to fiat trading in one of the largest cryptocurrency markets in the world. An update from @i2Rav:
We have begun trading DCR in large volume daily. The interest around DCR has really started to grow in terms of OTC quote requests. More and more customers are asking about trading it.
Like in previous month, Decred scores high by "% down from ATH" indicator being #2 on onchainfx as of June 6.
David Vorick (@taek) published lots of insights into the world of ASIC manufacturing (reddit). Bitmain replied. Bitmain released an ASIC for Equihash (archived), an algorithm thought to be somewhat ASIC-resistant 2 years ago. Threepure PoWcoins were attacked this month, one attempting to be ASIC resistant. This shows the importance of Decred's PoS layer that exerts control over miners and allows Decred to welcome ASIC miners for more PoW security without sacrificing sovereignty to them. Upbit was raided over suspected fraud and put under investigation. Following news reported no illicit activity was found and suggested and raid was premature and damaged trust in local exchanges. Circle, the new owner of Poloniex, announced a USD-backed stablecoin and Bitmain partnership. The plan is to make USDC available as a primary market on Poloniex. More details in the FAQ. Poloniex announced lower trading fees. Bittrex plans to offer USD trading pairs. @sumiflow made good progress on correcting Decred market cap on several sites:
speaking of market cap, I got it corrected on coingecko, cryptocompare, and worldcoinindex onchainfx, livecoinwatch, and cryptoindex.co said they would update it about a month ago but haven't yet I messaged coinlib.io today but haven't got a response yet coinmarketcap refused to correct it until they can verify certain funds have moved from dev wallets which is most likely forever unknowable (slack)
About This Issue
Some source links point to Slack messages. Although Slack hides history older than ~5 days, you can read individual messages if you paste the message link into chat with yourself. Digging the full conversation is hard but possible. The history of all channels bridged to Matrix is saved in Matrix. Therefore it is possible to dig history in Matrix if you know the timestamp of the first message. Slack links encode the timestamp: https://decred.slack.com/archives/C5H9Z63AA/p1525528370000062 => 1525528370 => 2018-05-05 13:52:50. Most information from third parties is relayed directly from source after a minimal sanity check. The authors of Decred Journal have no ability to verify all claims. Please beware of scams and do your own research. Your feedback is precious. You can post on GitHub, comment on Reddit or message us in #writers_room channel. Credits (Slack names, alphabetical order): bee, Richard-Red, snr01 and solar.
"Bitcoin consumes more energy than [insert country here]", "Bitcoin is DESTROYING the planet", "Bitcoin could cost us our green future" A deeper look into bullshit.
As you might have noticed there has been an explosion of mainstream media article about Bitcoin's energy consumption. I won't link these crap but here are the titles:
The guardian: "Bitcoin mining consumes more electricity a year than Ireland "
Express.co.uk "SHOCK CLAIM: Bitcoin is DESTROYING the planet and uses as much energy as DENMARK"
Vice: "Bitcoin Could Consume as Much Electricity as Denmark by 2020"
Mashable: "How to fix Bitcoin's energy-consumption problem"
CBS News:"Bitcoin mining consumes more energy than 159 countries"
Newscientist : "Bitcoin mining uses more energy than Ecuador – but there’s a fix"
CNN: "Bitcoin boom may be a disaster for the environment"
Bloomberg: "Bitcoin's Exorbitant Energy Costs May Prove to Be Biggest Risk"
The list goes on...
So what is the info? Where does it come from? How did they come up with it? Is it true? What is the info Wrapped in sensationalism, the info is the following:
energy consumption of the bitcoin network, which is responsible for verifying transactions made with the cryptocurrency, is 30.14TWh a year
Where does it come from Following direct links, or going through endless source circle of newspaper quoting one another, the source for absolutely all of these news article is the following website: https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption The about section contains the following:
Digiconomist is a platform that provides in-depth analysis, opinions and discussions with regard to Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. The goal of Digiconomist is to cover any relevant financial, economic or regulatory cryptocurrency-related topic.
Additionally a quick look at the website shows a few things: 1. The website only talks about ETH and BTC 2. Outside of the blog posts it almost only talks about energy consumption (there is an ETH obituaries) 3. Blog posts started in march 2014 4. The domain was registered the 2014-07-03 5. No address, no country, no name, no foundation, no agency... Who are they? Disregarding the fact that it comes from a no name website the, info is right there with a nice graph and even a methodology explained with a pretty infochart. It almost looks to good for a blog about cryptos. How did the Bloomberg, ars technica and the like found this website? I do not know, but when they did a ready to use report for newspaper was there waiting for them. Also, the graph as an url embedded at the bottom: "bitcoinenergyconsumption.com" which interestingly enough is a redirect for Digiconomist. Also the bottom of the page on consumption has a list of news articles referring to this website for their sensationalist claims. How did they come up with it So as I said the methodology is there, and the result of it is there too:
Bitcoin's current estimated annual electricity consumption* (TWh) 32.53
So let's dive into the methodology on a step by step process, first of all, a further detailed methodology is shown here
First, calculate the "Annualized global mining revenues (USD)", the website says: $13,487,831,695 As of this writing, on fork.lol, the reward for BTC is around r = 240 000 USD per block. r * 6 * 24 * 365 = 12 614 400 000. This is the same order of magnitude, but not good enough. Including the BCH reward as well (17 639 as we speak) gives : C = 13 541 505 840 USD. Seems about right.
Calculate the mining operating cost "Annualized estimated global mining costs" : $1,626,480,051 This is easy, it is simply 60% of the previous number C * 0.6 = 8 124 903 504 USD ??? Ok this is weird, their number is not even 60%, it is more like 12%. So where is that number coming from?? Turns out this 60% assumption is not used at all in the calculation...
Disregard the previous step
Calculate the current total hashrate on the network: 14.12 ExaHashes/s at the time of these lines
Assume the following:
Since the marginal product of mining is equal to the number of Bitcoins received per unit of mining effort, it would thus be expected that miners will either add more hashrate if the resulting revenue exceeds associated electricity costs, or reduce the hashrate once electricity costs start exceeding the revenue per hash. This also means that it is expected that the total network of Bitcoin miners is always mining at the calculate-able break-even efficiency. The break-even efficiency for Bitcoin mining can simply be calculated as: W per GH/s=(price∙BTC/day)/(price per kWh ∙ 24hrday)
In layman terms, this means that they assume that the number of miners is always the exact amount for break even. This is a fair assumption. The formula that follows it make no sense without the context it came with in that working paper. A quick look at this document shows concerning mathematical mistakes... I have tried for far too long, I cannot reproduce any of their numbers... So is it true? No These numbers are not reproducible, they make no sense and calculated using a dubious paper by some professor of "social research". I assume he is also the owner of the website because his name appears way too often in there...The university where he studies has a nice wikipedia page:
The New School is a private non-profit research university centered in Manhattan, New York City, USA, located mostly in Greenwich Village. It was founded in 1919 as an institution dedicated to academic freedom and intellectual inquiry, serving as a home for progressive thinkers.
The real estimation This is actually pretty straight forward. The maximum ever reached in hash rate was 16.5 exahashes/s according to fork.lol. This is equivalent to 1.18 million S9 ant miner at 14 TH/s. Assuming everyone suck and they all have old hardware with crappy PSU. Let's say each S9 consumes 2000W. This is a 17520000 Wh per year per miner, which yields 20.67 TWh. So peak production with very negatives assumptions yields a number 40% lower... General critic Deriving consumption from the mining revenue is purely ludicrous. No including the fees in the mining revenue calculation is also ludicrous. If your numbers are not reproducible, they are worthless.
Has the Bitcoin Hash Rate Peaked? Comparisons with Oil Show Interesting Findings
https://preview.redd.it/85lpl2md4e221.png?width=690&format=png&auto=webp&s=2d3bab69f0570a96f55d790d25f1b1ab08c0a49b https://cryptoiq.co/the-bitcoin-mining-hash-rate-has-similarities-to-peak-oil/ The Bitcoin mining hash rate had been exponentially increasing on average since the genesis block in 2009, from MH/s, to GH/s, to TH/s, to PH/s, to EH/s, and it reached an all-time record high of 62 EH/s on 26 August 2018. Since this peak was reached, the Bitcoin mining hash rate gradually plateaued and has now decreased. The chart of Bitcoin mining hash rate actually looks quite similar to a peak oil chart except on a much faster time-scale, as can be seen in the comparison between Bitcoin’s hash rate over the course of 2 years from Blockchain.com and North Sea oil production from an article in The Oil Drum: Europe by Euan Mearns. As explained below, the dynamics between peak oil and peak Bitcoin mining are similar, with the key difference that Bitcoin mining is decentralized and oil is not. https://preview.redd.it/op5ept1g4e221.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=2b3b35eb631f31a64ed7beb01f283832bd231e4c https://preview.redd.it/nfyhlf4h4e221.png?width=678&format=png&auto=webp&s=46a0ca7e11f274c5678f6421b1eebb788eab5197 Geologist M. King Hubbert is the founder of the peak oil theory, which states that there is a point when the maximum extraction rate of petroleum is reached, after which a terminal decline in production ensues. The peak rate of extraction of Bitcoin of course occurred during the period after the genesis block and before the first block halving, when the block reward was at its maximum of 50 Bitcoins. However, this is not the peak rate of mining profitability, since Bitcoin increased in price by orders of magnitude through the year 2017. The peak rate of Bitcoin mining profits undoubtedly was simultaneous with Bitcoin’s all-time record high of USD 20,000 in December 2017. The reason the peak hash rate did not coincide with the peak rate of Bitcoin mining profits is because the rally happened so quickly that mining operations were not able to add rigs fast enough, so there was a lag effect. Even for mining operations with large amounts of capital it can take months to obtain the amount of mining equipment that they want, and for other mining operations it took even longer because they had to obtain investors, buy land, build infrastructure, and only then could they install the rigs and begin hashing. The Bitcoin mining hash rate chart implicitly indicates that 30 EH/s of Bitcoin mining equipment has been taken offline due to lack of profitability, which represents tens of billions of USD of wasted rigs. This suggests that Bitcoin miners were caught by surprise by the decline in Bitcoin’s price from USD 20,000 to less than USD 4,000 as of 4 December 2018. Coming back to the peak oil comparison, the current Bitcoin mining scene is like a rapid version of peak oil, combined with lack of coordination. Oil mining is a centralized and coordinated activity, where the oil is prospected, land is leased out and then an appropriate number of wells are drilled. With oil mining, companies cannot drill as many wells as they want, or drill wells on someone else’s lease, since this is all closely controlled by contractual agreements. Bitcoin mining is decentralized, and no one has a lease or contract to only mine with a certain amount of hash rate. Anyone in the world can run as much Bitcoin mining rigs as they can afford. The effect is that people all around the world are sticking their straws into the Bitcoin mining network all at the same time, and they sucked it dry. Essentially, so many people started up new mining operations at once without coordination, that the Bitcoin mining hash rate went way past its equilibrium, which hurt everyone involved. This is akin to if oil drilling was a decentralized process, and anyone who wanted to drill for oil could drill in the same field. The oil field would be sucked dry really quick, and then most of the drills would be shut down due to lack of profits. There is hope for Bitcoin miners however. The price of Bitcoin simply has to rally, and all of the disenfranchised miners could restart their rigs, and then it would be back to the races and new rigs could begin being added. However, due to the decentralization of Bitcoin mining, the network hash rate will likely periodically rise past its equilibrium point, leading to catastrophic conditions for miners like we are experiencing today at points in the future. The only thing that could prevent the scenario we are experiencing today is a Bitcoin rally that lasts forever, which is obviously not possible. James McAvity tweeted that Bitcoin mining is still profitable in the current environment, and does some simple linear calculations to prove this point. He also argues that miners are forced to keep mining due to business agreements, choose to HODL in expectation of a rally, and continue mining in expectation of a downward difficulty adjustment as other miners go offline. https://twitter.com/jamesmcavity/status/1069669073552736256 Some of what McAvity says is true, but the reality is that Bitcoin mining is a highly non-linear system, and calculating the support level for mining is somewhat pointless, since it is different for every miner. Bitcoin mining profitability depends on Bitcoin’s price, the Bitcoin network hash rate which is directly correlated to mining difficulty, and the technological efficiency of Bitcoin mining rigs. These 3 factors are related in a non-linear and ever-changing way. Instead of trudging away at trying to develop a set of equations that determine mining hash rate behavior, one could simply look at the Bitcoin mining hash rate chart at the beginning of this article to understand what is going on. Bitcoin mining profitability is different for each individual miner, and the hash rate has trended downwards as individual miners have made the decision to shut down rigs. Clearly there was a fundamental mining profitability support level in the USD 6,000-7,000 range, since that is where Bitcoin’s price was when mining peaked and plateaued. There are clearly numerous miners who became unprofitable on the descent from that level to less than USD 4,000 today, and now approximately 50% of the Bitcoin mining equipment that exists cannot profitably mine. The decrease in Bitcoin’s mining difficulty of 15% on 3 December 2018 could help bring some of those miners back online, at least if the price stays at current levels around USD 4,000, but this will not change the overall trend. When it comes down to it, Bitcoin’s price is in control of Bitcoin mining profitability, and if the price goes up we could see a reversal of the hash rate downtrend and eventually a 2nd peak in Bitcoin’s network hash rate. However, if price continues to go down, the Bitcoin mining hash rate chart will follow a similar pattern to peak oil charts. The reality will likely be a combination of both. Bitcoin bear markets tend to last years, and get more severe, but eventually the rally comes and then Bitcoin exceeds its all-time record high. This would lead to a steady decrease in Bitcoin’s mining hash rate like the peak oil chart, followed by a rapid re-engagement of old mining rigs that have been taken offline, and then the addition of new generation Bitcoin mining rigs once the equilibrium hash rate exceeds 60 EH/s.
Authored by Valentin Schmid via The Epoch Times, While the price of bitcoin drops, miners get more creative... and some flourish. The bitcoin price is crashing; naysayers and doomsayers are having a field day. The demise of the dominant cryptocurrency is finally happening — or is it? Bitcoin has been buried hundreds of times, most notably during the brutal 90 percent decline from 2013 to 2015. And yet it has always made a comeback. Where the skeptics are correct: The second bitcoin bubble burst in December of last year and the price is down roughly 80 percent from its high of $20,000. Nobody knows whether and when it will see these lofty heights again. As a result, millions of speculators have been burned, and big institutions haven’t showed up to bridge the gap. This also happened on a smaller scale in 2013 after a similar 100x run-up, and it was necessary.
Time to Catch Up
What most speculators and even some serious proponents of the independent and decentralized monetary system don’t understand: Bitcoin needs these pauses to make improvements in its infrastructure. Exchanges, which could not handle the trading volumes at the height of the frenzy and did not return customer service inquiries, can take a breather and upgrade their systems and hire capable people. The technology itself needs to make progress and this needs time. Projects like the lightning network, a system which delivers instant bitcoin payments at very little cost and at virtually unlimited scale is now only available to expert programmers. A higher valuation is only justified if these improvements reach the mass market. And since we live in a world where everything financial is tightly regulated, for better or worse, this area also needs to catch up, since regulators are chronically behind the curve of technological progress. And of course, there is bitcoin mining. The vital infrastructure behind securing the bitcoin network and processing its transactions has been concentrated in too few hands and in too few places, most notably China, which still hosts about 70 percent of the mining capacity.
The Case For Mining
Critics have always complained that bitcoin mining consumes “too much” electricity, right now about as much as the Czech Republic. In energy terms this is around 65 terawatt hours or 230,000,000 gigajoules, costing $3.3 billion dollars according to estimates by Digiconomist. For the non-physicists among us, this is around as much as consumed by six million energy-guzzling U.S. households per year. All those estimates are imprecise because the aggregate cannot know how much energy each of the different bitcoin miners consumes and how much that electricity costs. But they are a reasonable rough estimate. So it’s worth exploring why mining is necessary to begin with and whether the electricity consumption is justified. Anything and everything humans do consumes resources. The question then is always: Is it worth it? And: Who decides? This question then leads to the next question: Is it worth having and using money? Most people would argue yes, because using money instead of barter in fact makes economic transactions faster and cheaper and thus saves resources, natural and human. _Merchants exchange goods with the inhabitants of Tidore, Indonesia, circa 1550. Barter was supplanted by using money because it is more efficient. (Archive/Getty Images)_If we are generously inclined, we will grant bitcoin the status of a type of money or at least currency as it meets the general requirements of being recognizable, divisible, portable, durable, is accepted in exchange for other goods and services, and in this case it is even limited in supply. So having any type of money has a price, whether it’s gold, dollar bills, or numbers on the screen of your online banking system. In the case of bitcoin, it’s the electricity and the capital for the computing equipment, as well as the human resources to run these operations. If we think having money in general is a good idea and some people value the decentralized and independent nature of bitcoin then it would be worth paying for verifying transactions on the bitcoin network as well as keeping the network secure and sound: Up until the point where the resources consumed would outweigh the efficiency benefits. Just like most people don’t think it’s a bad idea to use credit cards and banks, which consume electricity too. However, bitcoin is a newcomer and this is why it’s being scrutinized even more so than the old established players.
Different Money, Different Costs
How many people know how much electricity, human lives, and other resources gold mining consumes or has consumed in the course of history? What about the banking system? Branches, servers, air-conditioning, staff? What about printing dollar notes and driving them around in armored trucks? What about the social effects of monetary mismanagement of bank and government money like inflation as well as credit deflations? Gold gets a pass here. Most people haven’t asked that question, which is why it’s worth pointing out the only comprehensive study done on the topic in 2014. In “An Order of Magnitude” the engineer Hass McCook analyzes the different money systems and reaches mind-boggling conclusions. The study is a bit dated and of course the aggregations are also very rough estimates, but the ball park numbers are reasonable and the methodology sound. In fact, according to the study, bitcoin is the most economic of all the different forms of money. Gold mining in 2014 used 475 million GJ, compared to bitcoin’s 230 million in 2018. The banking system in 2014 used 2.3 billion gigajoules. Over 100 people per year die trying to mine gold. But mining costs more than electricity. It consumes around 300,000 liters of water per kilogram of gold mined as well as 150 kilogram (330 pounds) of cyanide and 1500 tons of waste and rubble. The international banking system has been used in all kinds of fraudulent activity throughout history: terrorist financing, money laundering, and every other criminal activity under the sun at a cost of trillions of dollars and at an order of magnitude higher than the same transactions done with cryptocurrency and bitcoin. And of course, while gold has a relatively stable value over time, our bank and government issued money lost about 90 percent of its purchasing power over the last century, because it can be created out of thin air. This leads to inflation and a waste of physical and human resources because it distorts the process of capital allocation. _The dollar has lost more than 90 percent of its value since the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913. (Source: St. Louis Fed)_This is on top of the hundreds of thousands of bank branches, millions of ATMs and employees which all consume electricity and other resources, 10 times as much electricity alone as the bitcoin network. According to monetary philosopher Saifedean Ammous, author of “The Bitcoin Standard,” the social benefit of hard money, i.e. money that can’t be printed by government decree, cannot even be fathomed; conversely, the true costs of easy money—created by government fiat and bank credit—are difficult to calculate. According to Ammous, bitcoin is the hardest money around, even harder than gold because its total supply is capped, whereas the gold supply keeps increasing at about 1-2 percent every year. “Look at the era of the classical gold standard, from 1871, the end of the Franco–Prussian War, until the beginning of World War I. There’s a reason why this is known as the Golden Era, the Gilded Age, and La Belle Epoque. It was a time of unrivaled human flourishing all over the world. Economic growth was everywhere. Technology was being spread all over the world. Peace and prosperity were increasing everywhere around the world. Technological innovations were advancing. “I think this is no coincidence. What the gold standard allowed people to do is to have a store of value that would maintain its value in the future. And that gave people a low time preference, that gave people the incentive to think of the long term, and that made people want to invest in things that would pay off over the long term … bitcoin is far closer to gold. It is a digital equivalent of gold,” he said in an interview with The Epoch Times. Of course, contrary to the gold standard that Ammous talks about, bitcoin doesn’t have a track record of being sound money in practice. In theory it meets all the criteria, but in the real world it hasn’t been adopted widely and has been so volatile as to be unusable as a reliable store of value or as the underlying currency of a productive lending market. The proponents argue that over time, these problems will be solved the same way gold spread itself throughout the monetary sphere replacing copper and seashells, but even Ammous concedes the process may take decades and the outcome is far from certain. Gold is the safe bet for sound money, bitcoin has potential. There is another measure where bitcoin loses out, according to a recent study by researchers from the Oak Ridge Institute in Cincinnati, Ohio. It is the amount of energy expended per dollar for different monetary instruments. One dollar worth of bitcoin costs 17 megajoules to mine versus five for gold and seven for platinum. But the study omits the use of cyanide, water, and other physical resources in mining physical metals. In general, the comparisons in dollar terms go against bitcoin because it is worth relatively less, only $73 billion in total at the time of writing. An issue that could be easily fixed at a higher price, but a higher price is only justified if the infrastructure improves, adoption increases, volatility declines, and the network proves its resilience to attacks over time. In the meantime, market participants still value the fact they can own a currency independent of the government, completely digital, easily fungible, and limited in supply, and relatively decentralized. And the market as a whole is willing to pay a premium for these factors reflected in the higher per dollar prices for mining bitcoin.
The Creativity of Bitcoin Mining
But where bitcoin mining lacks in scale, it makes up for it in creativity. In theory—and in practice—bitcoin mining can be done anywhere where there is cheap electricity. So bitcoin mining operations can be conducted not where people are (banking) or where government is (fiat cash) or where gold is (gold mining)—it can be done everywhere where there is cheap electricity Some miners are flocking to the heat of the Texan desert where gas is virtually available for free, thanks to another oil revolution. Other miners go to places where there is cheap wind, water, or other renewable energy. This is because they don’t have to build bank branches, printing presses, and government buildings, or need to put up excavators and conveyor belts to dig gold out of the ground. All they need is internet access and a home for the computers that look like a shipping container, each one of which has around 200 specialized bitcoin mining computers in them. “The good thing about bitcoin mining is that it doesn’t matter where on earth a transaction happens, we can verify it in our data center here. The miners are part of the decentralized philosophy of bitcoin, it’s completely independent of your location as well,” said Moritz Jäger, chief technology officer at bitcoin Mining company Northern Bitcoin AG.
But so far, this decentralization hasn’t worked out as well as it sounds in theory. Because Chinese local governments had access to subsidized electricity, it was profitable for officials to cut deals with bitcoin mining companies and supply them with cheap electricity in exchange for jobs and cutbacks. Sometimes the prices were as low as 2 dollar cents to 4 dollar cents per kilowatt hour. This is why the majority of bitcoin mining is still concentrated in China (around 70 percent) where it was the most profitable, but only because the Chinese central planners subsidized the price of electricity. This set up led to the by and large unwanted result that the biggest miner of bitcoin, a company called Bitmain, is also the biggest manufacturer of specialized computing equipment for bitcoin mining. The company reported revenues of $2.8 billion for the first half of 2018. Tourists walk on the dunes near a power plant in Xiangshawan Desert in Ordos of Inner Mongolia, in this file photo. bitcoin miners have enjoyed favorable electricity rates in places like Ordos for a long time. (Feng Li/Getty Images)Centralized mining is a problem because whenever there is one player or a conglomerate of players who control more than 50 percent of the network computing power, they could theoretically crash the network by spending the same bitcoin twice, the so called “double spending problem.“ They don’t have an incentive to do so because it would probably ruin the bitcoin price and their business, but it’s better not to have to rely on one group of people controlling an entire money system. After all, we have that exact same system with central banking and bitcoin was set up as a decentralized alternative. So far, no player or conglomerate ever reached that 51 percent threshold, at least not since bitcoin’s very early days, but many market participants always thought Bitmain’s corner of the market is a bit too close for comfort. This favorable environment for Chinese bitcoin mining has been changing with a crack down on local government electricity largess as well as a crackdown on cryptocurrency. Bitcoin itself and mining bitcoin remain legal in China but cryptocurrency exchanges have been banned since late 2017. But more needs to be done for bitcoin to become independent of the caprice of a centralized oppressive regime and local government bureaucrats.
Northern Bitcoin Case Study
Enter Northern Bitcoin AG. The company isn’t the only one which is exploring mining opportunities with renewable energies in locations other than China. But it is special because of the extraordinary set up it has for its operations, the fact that it is listed on the stock exchange in Germany, and the opportunities for scaling it discovered. The operations of Northern Bitcoin combine the beauties of bitcoin and capitalism in one. Like Texas has a lot of oil and free gas and it makes sense to use the gas rather than burn it, Norway has a lot of water, especially water moving down the mountains due to rainfall and melting snow. And it makes sense to use the power of the movement of the water, channel it through pipes into generators to create very cheap and almost unlimited electricity. Norway generates north of 95 percent of its total electricity from hydropower. A waterfall next to a hydropowerplant near Sandane, Norway, Oct. 25, 2018. (Valentin Schmid/The Epoch Times)Capitalism does not distinguish between renewable and fossil. It uses what is the most expedient. In this case, it is clearly water in Norway, and gas in Texas. As a side note on the beauties of real capital and the fact that capital and the environment need not be enemies, the water in one of the hydropowerplants close to the Northern Bitcoin facility is piped through a generator made in 1920 by J.M. Voith AG, a company from Heidenheim Germany. The company was established in 1867 and is still around today. The generator was produced in 1920 and is still producing electricity today.
In the remote regions of Northern Norway, there aren’t that many people or industry who would use the electricity. And rather than transport it over hundreds of miles to the industrial centers of Europe, the industries of the future are moving to Norway to the source of the cheap electricity. Of course, it is not just bitcoin mining, but other data and computing heavy operations like server farms for cloud computing that can be neatly packaged into one of those containers and shipped up north. “The containers are beautiful. They are produced in the middle of Germany where the hardware is enabled and tested. Then we put it on a truck and send it up here. When the truck arrives on the outside we lift it on the container vehicle. Two hours after the container arrives, it’s in the container rack. And 40 hours later we enable the cooling, network, power, other systems, and it’s online,” said Mats Andersson, a spokesman for the Lefdal Mine data center in Måløy, Norway, where Northern Bitcoin has its operations. Plug and play. A Northern Bitcoin data container inside the Lefdal Mine data center, in Måløy, Norway. (Northern Bitcoin)If the cheap electricity wasn’t enough—around 5 cents per kilowatt hour compared to 17 cents in Germany—Norway also provides the perfect storage for these data containers, which are normally racked up in open air parks above the ground. Also here, the resource allocation is beautiful. Instead of occupying otherwise useful and beautiful parcels of land and nature, the Northern Bitcoin containers and others are stored in the old Lefdal olivine mine. Olivine is a mineral used for steel production and looks green. Very fitting. Hence also the name of the data center: Lefdal Mine. “We take the green mineral out and we take the green IT in,” said Andersson.
Using the old mine as storage for the data center makes the whole process even more resource efficient. Why? So far, we’ve only been talking about bitcoin mining using a lot of energy. But what for? Before you have actually seen the process in action—and it is similar for other computing operations—you cannot imagine how bizarre it is. Most of the electricity is used to prevent the computers from overheating. So it’s not even the processors themselves; it’s the fans which cool the computer that use the most juice. This is where the mine helps, because it’s rather cool 160 meters (525 feet) below sea level; certainly cooler than in the Texas desert. But it gets even better. On top of the air blow-cooling the computer, the Lefdal data center uses a fresh water system to pump through the containers in pipes. The fans can then circulate air over the cool pipes which transfer the heat to the water. One can feel the difference when touching the different pipes. The fresh water closed circle loop then completes the “green” or resource efficiency cycle by transferring its heat to ice cold water from the nearby Fjord. The water is sucked in through a pipe from the Fjord, the heat gets transferred without the water being mixed, and the water flows back to the Fjord, without any impact on the environment. To top it all off, the mine has natural physical security far better than open air data centers and is even protected from an electromagnetic pulse blast because it’s underground.
_The Nordfjord near Måløy, Norway. The Lefdal data center takes the cold water from the fjord and uses it to cool the computer inside the mine. (Valentin Schmid/The Epoch Times)_Company Dynamics
Given this superlative set up, Northern Bitcoin wants to ramp up production as fast as possible at the Lefdal mine and other similar places in Norway, which have more mountains where data centers can be housed. At the moment, Northern Bitcoin has 15 containers with 210 mining machines each. The 15 containers produce around 5 bitcoin per day at a total cost of around $2,500 dollars at the end of November 2018 and after the difficulty of solving the math problems went down by ~17 percent. Most of it is for electricity; the rest is for leasing the containers, renting the mine space, buying and writing off the mining computers, personnel, overhead, etc. Even at the current relatively depressed prices of around $4000, that’s a profit of $1500 per bitcoin or $7,500 per day. But the goal is to ramp it up to 280 containers until 2019, producing 100 bitcoin per day. Again, the company is in the sweet spot to do this. As opposed to the beginning of the year when one could not procure a mining computer from Bitmain even if one’s life depended on it, the current bear market has made them cheap and relatively available both new and second had from miners who had to cease operations because they can’t produce at low bitcoin prices. Northern Bitcoin containers inside the Lefdal Mine data center in Måløy, Norway. (Northern Bitcoin)What about the data shipping containers? They are manufactured by a company called Rittal who is the world market leader. So it helps that the owner of Rittal also owns 30 percent of the Lefdal mine, providing preferential access to the containers. Northern Bitcoin said it has enough capital available for the intermediate goal of ramping up to 50 containers until the end of year but may tap the capital markets again for the next step. The company can also take advantage of the lower German corporate tax rate because revenue is only recorded when the bitcoin are sold in Germany, not when they are mined in Norway. Of course, every small-cap stock—especially bitcoin companies—have their peculiarities and very high risks. As an example, Northern Bitcoin’s financial statements, although public, aren’t audited. The equipment in the Lefdal mine in Norway is real and the operations are controlled by the Lefdal personnel, but one has to rely on exclusive information from the company for financials and cost figures, so buyer beware.
Northern Bitcoin wants to have 280 containers, representing around 5 percent of the network’s computing power. But the Lefdal mine alone has a capacity to power and cool 1,500 containers in a 200 megawatt facility, once it is fully built out. “Here you have all the space, power, and cooling that you need. … Here you can grow,” said Lefdal’s Andersson. A mine shaft in the Lefdal Mine data center in Måløy, Norway. The whole mine will have a capacity for 1500 containers once fully built out. (Valentin Schmid/The Epoch Times)The Norwegian government was behind an initiative to bring computing power to Norway and make it one of the prime destinations for data centers at the beginning of this decade. To that effect, the local governments own part of the utility companies which operate the power plants and own part of the Lefdal Mine and other locations. But even without notable subsidies (i.e. cash payments to companies), market players were able to figure it out, for everybody’s benefit. The utilities win because they can sell their cheap electricity close to home. The computing companies like IBM and Northern Bitcoin win because they can get cheap electricity, storage, and security. Data center operators like Lefdal win because they can charge rent for otherwise unused and unneeded space. However, in a recent about face, the central government in Oslo has decided to remove cryptocurrency miners from the list of companies which pay a preferential tax rate on electricity consumption. Normally, energy intensive companies, including data centers, pay a preferential tax on electricity consumed of 0.48 øre ($0.00056 ). According to a report by Norwegian media Aftenposten, this tax will rise to 16.58 øre ($0.019) in 2019 for cryptocurrency miners exclusively. The argument by left wing politician Lars Haltbrekken who sponsored the initiative: “Norway cannot continue to provide huge tax incentives for the most dirty form of cryptocurrency output […] [bitcoin] requires a lot of energy and generates large greenhouse gas emissions globally.” Since Norway generates its electricity using hydro, precisely the opposite is true: No greenhouse gas emissions, or any emissions for that matter would be produced, if all cryptomining was done in Norway. As opposed to China, where mining is done with coal and with emissions. But not only in Norway is the share of renewable and emission free energy high. According to research by Coinshares, Bitcoin’s consumes about 77.6 percent of its energy in the form of renewables globally. However self-defeating the arguments against bitcoin mining in Norway, the political initiative is moving forward. What it means for Northern Bitcoin is not clear, as they house their containers in Lefdal’s mixed data center, which also has other clients, like IBM. “It’s not really decided yet; there are still big efforts from IT sectors and parties who are trying to change it. If the decision is taken it might apply for pure crypto sites rather than mixed data centers, like ours,” said Lefdal’s Andersson. Even in the worst-case scenario, it would mean an increase from ~5 cents to ~6.9 cents per kilowatt hour, or 30 percent more paid on the electricity by Northern Bitcoin, which at ~$3250 would still rank it among the most competitive producers in the world. Coinshares estimates the average production price at $6,800 per Bitcoin at $0,05 per kilowatt hour of electricity and an 18-months depreciation schedule, but concedes that a profitable miner could “[depreciate] mining gear over 24-30 months, or [pay] less for mining gear than our estimates.” Jäger says Northern Bitcoin depreciates the equipment over three years and has obtained very favorable prices from Bitmain, making its production much more competitive than the average despite the same cost of electricity. In addition, the natural cooling in the mine also reduces electricity costs overall.
Cheap Producer Advantage
At the moment, however, the tax could be the least of any miners worry, as the bitcoin price is in free-fall. But what happens when the price crashes further? Suffice it to say that there was bitcoin mining when the dollar price was less than 1 cent and there will be bitcoin mining at lower prices thanks to the design of the network. Mao Shixing, the founder of mining pool F2pool estimated 600,000 miners have shut down since the November crash in price, according to a report by Coindesk. As it should be in a competitive system, the most energy intensive and obsolete machines are shut down first. As with every other commodity, when the price drops, some miners will leave the market, leaving space for cheaper competitors to capture a bigger share. But with bitcoin this is a bit simpler than with copper or gold for example. When a big copper player goes bankrupt, its competitors have to ramp up production and increase cost to increase their market share. With bitcoin, if 3,000 computers get taken off the total mining pool, they won’t be able to mine the approximately 5 bitcoin any longer. However, because the difficulty of solving the computationally intensive cryptographic tasks of bitcoin decreases automatically when there are fewer computers engaged in the task, the other players just have to leave their machines running at the same rate for the same cost and they will split the 5 bitcoin among them. “The moment the price goes down, our production price will go down as well,” said Jäger, a process that already happened from November to December when the difficulty decreased twice in November and the beginning of December. This naturally favors players like Northern Bitcoin, which are producing at the lower end of the cost spectrum. They will be the ones who shut down last. And this is a good thing. The more companies like Northern Bitcoin, and countries like Norway—even with the extra tax—the more decentralized the bitcoin system. The more computers there are in different hands mining bitcoin, the more secure the system becomes, because it will be ever more difficult for one player to reach the 50 percent threshold to crash the system.It is this decentralized philosophy which has kept the bitcoin system running for 10 years. Whether at $1 or $20,000.
bitcoin mining profitable in the US? Where are my calculations off?
Someone tell me where my calculations are wrong. Amazon has this miner advertised: Antminer S9 ~14.0TH/s @ .098W/GH 16nm ASIC Bitcoin Miner So that would consume 14000*0.98=1372 watts. Given my electricity costs (0.12 $/kwhr), I would make $8.19 for every $1 of electricity. In a month, I would make $884. That can't be right. Where did I screw up? Here is a python script to calculate that:
edit: thanks to Personthingman2. 25 vs 12.5 block reward. when I change that, my script outputs: rev=0.000194444444444 cost=4.74798641087e-05 ratio=4.09530330582 profit per month=380.93219223 This is a $4000 unit, so it pays for itself in 10 months. OK. So whether I will ever make money on this depends heavily on the growth of the network hashing rate over time, and the increase in BTC price. edit2: I am guessing that the answer to my question is that I would be lucky for the unit to keep working long enough to pay for itself. It would likely break down before reaching that point.
So I got alittle lucky last week, I had 30 remaining $ in my bitcoin wallet, I've had them for months. I found a bitcoin betting website, I deposited $10, Turned it into $300. Cashed out, I ordered 2 Antminer S3+'s with a 1000W HP server power supply kit with wiring/adapter for the miners. Electricity costs me .08$/kWh, $10 invested, How accurate are bitcoin miner calculators? Like coinwarz for example, you can insert difficulty, electricity costs, watts, and GH/s, Based off that calculator, I'm looking at $27 a month profit, Which is next to nothing. But it costs me $10 to start so who cares right? Does anyone have any tips for someone new to it (I've followed bitcoins and mining a bit but never done it) Also any pool advice for when I get my miners?
Chill everyone, let's talk bitcoin internals, fundamentals and what it means for price.
So I've been watching bitcoin for a couple weeks, and i got a bit of my own dough into it. Of recent everybody seems obsessed with the vast accumulation of wealth in the hands of few, and the hordes of panicky upstarts trying to get in, who might get screwed by falling prices (for instance see this lovely post Hyperbole Now I'm not saying that the doomsday scenario the prophets are peddling is impossible. But it's about as possible as the wonderland prophets who're hoping for a 100'0000% return. Trojans On a related note, yeah some trojan started targeting wallet.dat, surprise surprise. Incidentally, that the same machine you're making VISA payments from and operate your e-banking? You worried about that too? Not? Well I don't see VISA shares falling every time somebody infects himself with a keylogger. Pricing So I thought a fair bit about where prices are going to go, and why, and I asked a lot of people and talked this over, and after this, a few things remain that give some direction. A price of a security (like bitcoins, or gold, stocks, fiat money etc.) is ultimately determined by supply and demand. If you understand supply and demand, you understand prices. So an important consideration is who's bidding for bitcoins, and who's asking for a price to sell them, and what prices to these parties consider reasonable. Buyers (bid) This is a diverse group of people, it may include people who use the small but fledgling bitcoin economy to buy coins to pay other people in them. But by far and large, it's probably a speculation driven market, people buy bitcoins in the hopes the value will rise. The psychology speculative buying ends up being about a zero-sum game. Somebody buys, somebody sells, the overall activity neither adds or removes coins from the market, and hence when viewed over long periods (months/years) this activity is just white-noise. This defines the demand, and demand rises and falls with bitcoin popularity and confidence. Some week confidence may be low, some it may be high. Sellers (ask) This roughly falls into two camps. The speculative sellers and the miners. Speculative selling (that is sells of coins bought earlier) is the other half of the zero-sum game, it neither adds or removes coins overall, and is hence just white noise. Freshly minted coins (by miners) which enter the market are the real driver of supply. The limited and small constant supply myth Every 10 minutes 50 new bitcoins are found. That is a fact, and if it strays from that, the difficulty adjusts to keep it there. If you look at it purely from the point of view of scarcity, this would seem a small (but nearly ignorable) inflationary influence. This however would be an over-simplification. There are substantial amounts of mined coins held by people who've been mining them for the better part of a year. They've been hoarding these coins, and commonly I'd refer to this group as bitcoinionaires. Their actually supply capacity vastly exceeds the day to day supply of fresh coins. Since these stockpiles are the real driver of the supply, it's important to understand when the miners/bitcoinonaires will sell and when they will not. Mining economics The mined bitcoins where obtained by the activity you call mining. This is neither an easy nor free way to get coins. It takes energy, room, time to setup, etc. There are constant costs attached to this (paying rent and electricity) as well as recoverable costs (buying hardware to do it) and unquantifiable costs (work rendered to make it all happen). You can think of mining as a business that has expenses and profits. In order for that business to work, the constant expenses must be covered, the recoverable expenses must be recoverable, and the work invested must be repaid. This all leads to a fairly straightforward calculation which goes something like this: You pay around 1000$ for one 1gh/s (one gigahash per second) in hardware. Running that hardware you pay about 2-3$/day/gh in energy. If you factor in rent of some or another form, you probably pay between 1-5$/day/gh in rent. If you also factor in resale value decay of the hardware you bought, you immediately lose about 20% upon buying the hardware, and around 30%/year. As a business you probably plan to run your miner for more then half a year, so about 50% of the hardware cost has to be recovered in a reasonable time-frame, say 3 months. Which means there's a hardware recovery calculation that you should do that factors in at about 2$/day/gh If you sum that all up, you get a running cost of mining that is around 5-10$/day/gh. One gigahash will get you about 1.2btc/day at current difficulty, which is at current prices somewhere around 17-20$. It is fairly obvious that your expenses need to be lower then your profits. If they are not, what happens? Difficulty You may have heard about difficulty, in essence it is a constant value (for 2 weeks) that aims to keep the rate of fresh coins at about 50coins/10minutes. Obviously, the more difficult it gets, the less coins 1 gh/s will mint, and the more difficult the economy of a mining business becomes. miner psychology Since you can't simply acquire and sell hardware capacity on a dime (it takes weeks and months to do it), and since you will need months to recover your boot costs, miner selling is out of necessity a long-term affair. So what can a miner do when the price of btcs falls below their operational cost?
They can give up mining, much to the delight of everyboy who has not given up, because if they do, the difficulty will go down, hence making their business profitable again. This is essentially an inflationary influence (since btcs get easier to obtain with lowering difficulty, hence making miners willing to sell at lower prices).
They can stop selling, hoping for better times when the prices are more favorable. This is essentially a deflationary influence, since the big stockpile supply of coins held by miners will simply dry out. They'll not sell for months and perhaps years.
They can sell at prices below their operation cost, in which case they soon cease to be a factor, because they're out of business.
bitcoinionaire psychology If prices go down and you sit on a big pile of coins, you lose wealth. Nobody likes loosing wealth, I don't like it, you don't like it, the bitcoinionaires don't like it. In order to become a bitcoinionaire you need to be a hoarder. If you wouldn't hoard, you wouldn't have tens of thousands of bitcoins. A hoarder essentially never likes letting go of his stash. You get rid of as little of your stash as possible to keep your risk and costs in a reasonable balance. Which means, these fat-cats depicted in the picture above, they didn't sell you all they had, not even a fraction. They sold you just about as much as they where personally willing to sacrifice. This means that they're still having the majority of their wealth in the game, and they absolutely do not want to see that devalued to zero. I've talked to a bunch of these very decent folks, and their sentiment is that they're in for the long haul. True they'll sell "big" positions occasionally, but they keep the majority of their assets stashed away. If you're expecting the miners/bitcoinionaires to suddenly explode with supply at lowering prices, you're most likely mistaken. the difficulty/price correlation For the reasons outlined above, there's a very simple correlation. If prices go down and difficulty goes up, by far and large supply dries out. However lower prices drive demand (in bitcoin volume) up, because as the price goes down, the buying power (in $/btc) of the would-be buyers increases. And if the market self-balancing fails, then the difficulty adjust will step in once enough miners have given up. In sum these dynamics lead to deflation. Since difficulty and hardware turnover moves at a much slower pace then prices, prices are far more likely to adjust to difficulty then the other way around in the long term. What does all of this mean? Keep a cool head, and don't let the market fool you. Trust your fundamentals, technicals and sentiment analysis, and tightly control your risk only to what you personally can afford to lose. If you buy in a mania or sell in a panic (we've see both the past 2 weeks), you're probably going to lose (or diminish your profits). Study bitcoin and what drives it carefully and come to your own conclusion. Adjust your strategy carefully and maybe, one day a couple years from now, you can be a bitcoinionaire. If not, life is full of other opportunities, so just pick yourself up and try the next. So chill everyone, and have a good time :)
12-10 23:33 - 'Lets have a discussion about energy consumption in bitcoin mining and what that means towards the carbon footprint today.' (self.Bitcoin) by /u/Cryptolution removed from /r/Bitcoin within 1-11min
''' There was a [very good coindesk article in July 2014]1 that broke down the carbon footprint of the bitcoin mining network. At the date of the article, our hashrate was 146,505 TH/s. Now that we are at above 13 exahashes/s this represents a 94 fold increase hashing power. [Here is the cost breakdown chart from the coindesk article]2 . As you can see from this image, the carbon footprint of bitcoin in 2014 is a tiny fraction compared to the carbon footprint of the traditional banking system. Yet at a 0.78 Billion per year cost in 2014, at a 94 fold increase of power that would now be 73.32 billion, which would make bitcoin 9.52 billion more in electricity costs. But this is trying to extrapolate data in a non-accurate way. In order to understand why this is inaccurate, we must look at how all of this technology works and how technology has scaled upwards while decreasing electricty consumption. The bitcoin network at 13 exahashes is roughly 130 times greater than the largest super computer (Sunway, 93 petahashes per sec in china, see [top500.org]3 ) So when you make that statement, you think "wow, bitcoin must use a lot of energy to be 130 times more powerful than the largest super computer network!" But, its not apples to oranges. These super computer networks are non-specialized hardware (comparably to bitcoin) in that they have generalized computing capabilities. This means that these systems require more standardized hardware so that they can preform a large amount of different computing functions. So, for example, the largest Sunway supercomputer @ 93 petaflops (roughly 1/130th the power of the bitcoin network) preforms its calculations at 93,014.6 petahashes @ 15,371 kW = 93014000 Gh @ 15370000 watts. Doing the maths, this comes out to a 0.16524 W/Gh. The AntMiner S9 currently operates at 0.098 Gh ....so nearly double the energy efficiency of what the most powerful super computer network in the world operates at. You have the Dragonmint miner coming out Q1-Q2 in 2018 which uses 0.075J/GHs ....a 30% efficiency increase over the Antminer S9. And next year japanese giant GMO is launching into the bitcoin mining business, stating they will be releasing a 7nm ASIC design, which is more than double the efficiency of the current 16nm design the Antminer S9 uses. This will mean a more than doubling of energy efficiency. They said they have plans after the release of the first product to research "5nm, and 3.5nm mining chips" So, what is the point of understanding all of this? Well, you have to understand how technology scales (think Moore's law) to understand how we can achieve faster computational speeds (more exahashes per second) without increasing the carbon footprint. So if you look at a proof of work chart, you'll see it has scaled linearly upwards since the birth of bitcoin. And it would be logical to assume that the more hashes per sec thrown into the network, that it would equate to more power being spent. Yet this is not true due to advancements in ASIC chip design, power efficiency, and basic economic fundamentals. You see, as new miners come out, because they are more efficient, people can run much faster mining rigs at much lower cost. This immediately adds much more hashing power to the network, which decreases the profitability of old miners. And to give you an idea of how much more cost efficient these are, lets look at Antminers products. S9 - 0.098 W/Gh S7 - 0.25 W/Gh Avalon6 - 0.29 w/Gh You can see the S9 is 3 times more power efficient than the Avalon6. That translates to "It costs 3 times more to operate this equipment". That aint no small difference. These differences, combined with energy costs are what forces miners to stop running old hardware and to upgrade to newer models or exit mining completely. So as new mining equipment hits the market, old less efficient mining rigs go offline. The amount of hashes per sec continues to climb, yet the actual power usage of the entire network does not scale at the same rate that the hashes per sec scale at, due to increased energy efficiency. The question that I would like to see answered by the community is this - What has changed between now and 2014 in terms of total watts consumed? How can we calculate the real carbon footprint of todays bitcoin mining network compared to this data from 2014? What equipment was running in 2013-2014, what were their W/Gh and how many of these machines do we speculate are still running vs more efficient mining rigs powering the network today? What is the Th/S differences between these mining rigs, and how much more power do we contribute towards the network today because of these optimized rigs? Mining is not my specialty and there are going to be many people here who are better suited to tackling these problems. I think these questions need to be answered and articulated because these are questions that im starting to see a lot from the mainstream as criticism towards bitcoin. I know the generic answer, aka "Bitcoin mining still uses a fraction of the cost that the entire global banking system does", but we really need to do better than that. We need to examine the different power types used in bitcoin mining - How much of bitcoin mining is from hydroelectric? Nuclear? Wind? Solar? Coal? Natural Gas? What regions contribute the largest hashing power and can we evaluate whether these regions are Hydroelectric, Coal, Nuclear etc dependent? If we are to articulate effective arguments against those who naysay bitcoin over its carbon footprint, then we must do so with good data to backup our positions. Hopefully the numbers above are accurate/correct. Honestly only spent a few minutes doing napkin math, so I expect there to be mistakes, please let me know and thank you very much all. ''' Lets have a discussion about energy consumption in bitcoin mining and what that means towards the carbon footprint today. Go1dfish undelete link unreddit undelete link Author: Cryptolution 1: https://www.coindesk.com/microscope-conclusions-costs-bitcoin/ 2: https://imgur.com/a/eKipC 3: ww**top500*org/*ists*2*17/11* Unknown links are censored to prevent spreading illicit content.
Bitcoin value. Current value at ~1000 USD. Profits above calculated at 900 USD Bitcoin difficulty: 1,180,923,195 Bitcoins per Block (BTC/block): 25 Conversion rate (USD/BTC): 900 Hash rate: 100 GH/s Electricity rate (USD/kWh): 0.09 Power consumption (W): 3 Time frame (months): 3 Cost of mining hardware (USD): 3011.98 Profitability decline per year: 0.61 Difficulty 1,180,923,195.00 Mining Factor 100: 0.04 USD/[email protected]/s Hardware break even: 84 days Net profit first time frame: 279.64 USD Coins per 24h at these conditions: 0.0426 BTC Power cost per 24h: 0.01 USD Revenue per day: 38.33 USD Less power costs: 38.32 USD System efficiency: 33333.33 MH/s/W Mining Factor 100 at the end of the time frame: 0.03 USD/[email protected]/s Average Mining Factor 100: 0.04 USD/[email protected]/s Power cost per time frame: 0.59 USD Revenue per time frame: 3292.21 USD Less power costs: 3291.62 USD Hardware Cost Breakdown: 100GH Overclockable Bitcoin Miner Kit 2,800.00 USD https://megabigpower.com/shop/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=70 RASPBERRY PI MODEL B 700Mhz; 512Mb RAM 41.99 USD http://www.amazon.com/RASPBERRY-MODEL-700Mhz-512Mb-RAM/dp/B009SQQF9C/ref=sr_1_1?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1389015864&sr=1-1 Cooler Master Silent Pro Gold 800W 169.99 USD http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817171057 Whatever amount you want to invest determines your percentage of the profits. Example: Total Investment Cost: 3011.98 USD Investor #1: 75 USD = %2.4 Profit Share, net profit of 6.97 USD after 3 months Investor #2: 500 USD = %16.6 Profit Share, net profit of 46.50 USD after 3 months Investor #3: 906.60 USD = %30.1 Profit Share Investor #4: 1505.99 USD = %50 Profit Share 874.16 USD net profit after 3 months with a $800 investment. Mining pool fee. Typically 3%. P2Pool offers 0% mining pool fee. https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool
Anyone want a free cloud-hosted 10 GH/s bitcoin miner?
So I guess I can send invites to anyone's email, and if you make a new account at zenminers and complete the account tour (takes 30 seconds) you get a completely free 10 GH/s miner. Not a lot of power in the bitcoin mining world, but, hey, it's free! First come, first serve. I believe I may have a limited supply of invites. So, if you're interested, comment/PM me your email and I'll send an invite to you when I get home. I think you could also sell the hashlet on the market for an easy $5-ish Fine Print: Thisisanemailreferral,notalink.Ican'tsendnon-referralemails.IguessIgetsomethingifyoueverbuyanythingfromtheironlinestore. EDIT: Profitability calculator link: here. Not much but it's free. EDIT2: AS OF THIS EDIT, EVERYONE WHO PM'D ME THEIR EMAIL HAS BEEN SENT AN INVITE
Finally, I have received my BFL Single SC 60 GHz miner from ButterflyLabs. So am I happy? Well, not really! I have ordered it back on July 2012, when they pretended they would deliver in october 2012, or so, you remember? Does it work? Yes - very noisy (like when you are in a plane), but it achieves 55 GH/s sustained rate. Will it pay for itself? Probably not! At 0.4 BTC/day (current difficulty 65750060 + current progression + 30% every 2 weeks), I can expect something like 20 BTC in one year (see http://btcinvest.net/bitcoin-mining-profit-calculator.php). Why do you think Butterfly finally decided to ship rather than run for themselves as they probably did until now? So I have decided to sell mine at the end of September! I have an offer for 9 BTC. Anyone better? I feel really sorry about all you guys who have still not received their orders from BFL. Any current product from BFL is not cost effective anymore if you just start mining now. This is just reality! What do you think? Anyone prove me wrong?
I'm interested in the possibility of mining Bitcoins, however it seems th internet is very divided on whether it is a decent investment or not. If for instance I ordered This BFL 30 GH/s Bitcoin Miner What are the estimates for breaking even and such? From here http://www.bitcoinx.com/profit/ it seems to be telling me that I would earn roughly 2.25BTC/day which is over $150 at the current rate. Also how does the price of BTC effect the profitability of mining? (Many of the articles I have been researching are from before the recent boom to the current rate of $72 so calculations of profit must be different now right? However Am I right in saying that the price increase would create a possible surge of miners which in turn would increase difficulty? TL;DR Is it worth getting this and how much could you make?
Accurate Bitcoin mining calculator trusted by millions of cryptocurrency miners. Updated in 2020, the newest version of the Bitcoin profit calculator makes it simple and easy to quickly calculate mining profitability for your Bitcoin mining hardware. Bitcoin Private (BTCP) mining profit depending on your hash rate, power consumption and electricity cost. Bitcoin Private (BTCP) Mining Calculator $9204.95 $43.24 $71.02 $64.39 $230.74 $55.79 $6.07 The Bitcoin price is rising at a slightly lesser 0.3403% per day over the past year. We suggest you enter a custom Bitcoin price into our calculator based on what you expect the average price to be over the next year. The price has gone down for most of the past year, which is a factor that should be strongly considered in your calculations. NeoScrypt mining calculator, pools, and coins. 10.7781 GH/s network hashrate and 19 coins. Check profitability for mining with AMD and Nvidia GPUs. Mining Profit Calculator is an app for calculating the profit received from the rental of hashing power for mining Bitcoin. With its help, you will learn the potential income from cryptocurrency cloud mining, evaluate the prospects and relevance of cooperation. This tool is convenient for both beginner miners and regular customers of the company.
We take a look at profitability of USB miner solo mining Bitcoin and Litecoin. What are the chances to find a block on your own own of 12.5 BTC or 25 LTC. Chances are almost the same as winning ... bitmain antminer z15,antminer z15 price,antminer z15 review,antminer z15 specs,antminer z15 profit,antminer z15 canada,antminer z15 bitmain,antminer z15 calculator,antminer z15 profitability ... bitmain antminer z15,antminer z15 price,antminer z15 review,antminer z15 specs,antminer z15 profit,antminer z15 canada,antminer z15 bitmain,antminer z15 calculator,antminer z15 profitability ... bitmain antminer z15,antminer z15 price,antminer z15 review,antminer z15 specs,antminer z15 profit,antminer z15 canada,antminer z15 bitmain,antminer z15 calculator,antminer z15 profitability ... MINING PIRL RESULTS ACTUAL VS CALCULATOR PROFIT REVIEW PIRL $1.40 ETH UBIQ PIRL ... Mine Bitcoin and other Cryptocurrencies DAILY with HashFlare! ... ($4.10 Up 40%) Mining Taking OFF $5000 ...