> A block could have 1 or 1000 transactions, but the energy consumption would be the same.
The calculations are based on the maximum throughput of the Bitcoin protocol, which is a fixed value due to the 10-minute block time and the limited block size.
> The proof-of-work is completely independent of the number of transactions.
Right, which makes this whole thing even more ridiculous. If number of transactions went to zero we'd still have to burn 120+ TWh per year just to keep the system going.
The 165kWh per transaction calculation is the best case scenario assuming every block is filled to the maximum with transactions.
Incorrect.
The proof of work difficulty scales automatically. If the miners/hash-power reduces then blocks become easier to mine.
The Bitcoin blockchain could subsist on a minuscule fraction of todays energy usage if the majority of miners decided to throw away their investments and stop mining.
Is this a joke? Yes, bitcoin could function without using any energy at all if there where no transactions and no miners. That doesn’t change that currently independent of transaction numbers a huge amount of energy is being wasted, and the minimal waste per transaction in a theoretical maximum transactions/energy scenario would still have you spending more than our entire energy production just heating up silicon if we relied entirely on Bitcoin for financial transactions.
Energy isn't being wasted, that's the point. What proof of work and the blockchain allows is a monetary network that (a) does not rely on trusted third parties for verification, whose (b) unit of currency does not rely on states or central banks, which cannot be trusted to avoid inflation.
Whatever else you may think of those features, it's a bit weird to call it pure waste when clearly millions of people find this incredibly valuable.
The calculations are based on the maximum throughput of the Bitcoin protocol, which is a fixed value due to the 10-minute block time and the limited block size.
The average number of transactions per block is always around 2K: https://www.blockchain.com/charts/n-transactions-per-block
> The proof-of-work is completely independent of the number of transactions.
Right, which makes this whole thing even more ridiculous. If number of transactions went to zero we'd still have to burn 120+ TWh per year just to keep the system going.
The 165kWh per transaction calculation is the best case scenario assuming every block is filled to the maximum with transactions.