One of the points I appreciate is the comparison to a gold based investment strategy. Though unlike other commodities (like gold) but coin itself is not useful. At least with gold something can be made, Bitcoin consists of a completed computation so you’re paying for something that’s been used.
Nic Carter, a bitcoiner, had some interesting points about Bitcoin's energy consumption on Lex Fridman's podcast (EP. #173)<p>He suggests that most of the energy Bitcoin consumes generally comes from places that consistently produce an excess of energy that otherwise goes to waste. Miners, seeking to maximize profit, gravitate to areas where energy is cheap because supply > demand. I'm not sure what percentage of the energy could be considered "excess."<p>His other point was that the discussion of Bitcoin's energy consumption should be framed in the context of how much value it brings to the global community. Expecting a valuable global decentralized asset to be entirely without energy costs is unrealistic, it's just a matter of how much energy is feasible. Depending on how valuable Bitcoin is deemed to be, consuming the same amount of electricity as a small country might be justified in the short term, but should clearly be addressed in mid term.
<i>(2013)</i><p>Often referenced, submitted a year ago, 3 years ago, 7 years ago<p>Here's a bunch of previous discussion:
<a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15796556" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15796556</a>
Bitcoin converts computational energy into a digital store of that value which can be transferred anywhere, any time, in any amount, without the need for a trusted third-party, for a miniscule portion of that value. To assert this is a waste or that it doesn't have value is disingenuous.