ArticleFrontiers in big data2023
An extended approach to appraise electricity distribution and carbon footprint of bitcoin in a smart city.
Article in Frontiers in big data, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A nation cannot sustain a highly productive and efficient population without smart cities. Due to their significant reliance on digital technologies, these cities require a high level of cybercrime protection. Cryptocurrencies have gained significant attention due to their secure and reliable infrastructure. The decentralised cryptocurrency operates in a trust-less environment known as the blockchain, where each network participant has a ledger copy of all transactions. Blockchain technology employs a proven consensus mechanism without requiring establishment of a central authority. But the consensus mechanism requires miner to solve a cryptographic problem by generating random hashes until one of them matches the desired one. This procedure is energy-intensive, and when thousands of miners repeat it to verify a single transaction, a substantial amount of electricity is consumed. Moreover, electricity produces a significant amount of carbon footprint. Patch methodology utilises the data of all hashes created per year and the efficiency of mining hardware over a 10-year period to calculate the Bitcoins energy consumption. Due to a large number of unknown and uncertain factors involved, it is difficult to precisely calculate a single value for electricity consumption and carbon footprint as reported by Patch methodology. The proposed method extends the Patch methodology by adding a maximum and minimum limit to the hardware efficiency as well as the sources of power generation, which can help refine estimates of electricity consumption and carbon emissions for a more accurate picture. Using the proposed methodology, it was estimated that Bitcoin consumed between 38.495 and 120.72 terawatt hours of electricity in 2021 and released between 2.12 and 45.37 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide. To address the issue of excessive energy consumption and carbon emissions, a significant number of individual miners and mining pools are relocating to energy-intensive regions, such as aluminium mining sites that rely on hydroelectricity for energy generation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.