Markit
So what do you consider "green" energy in your opinion? Just out of curiosity...[/QUOTE]Windmills, hydropower and lighting my farts (could run a small kampung).
PERtoDPS
Have you tried Bitcoin or a stablecoin like USDT or USDC? Fast, cheap & easy.[/QUOTE]If you're doing it that way I've been selling USDT on the Tron network (TRC 20) as gas fees have been ludacris lately. This way is much cheaper fees and same result.
JackStraw
Windmills, hydropower and lighting my farts (could run a small kampung).[/QUOTE]Windmills? Ok Don Quixote, let's talk about that. In [URL='https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aae102']this study[/URL] published by Harvard Researchers, they determined using windmills, in an energy-intensive society with only renewable energy would require vast amounts of land. For example, current demand for electricity in the United States (not including gasoline, fuel, and natural gas as for space heating and fertiliser production) will cover an area twice the size of California with wind turbines.So they are incredibly inefficient, not to mention ugly, contribute to noise pollution and also kill birds as well.As for hydropower, now that is something I can get on board with. in fact, they are already started to build a [URL='https://www.waterpowermagazine.com/news/newsbitcoin-mining-pool-launched-powered-by-hydropower-8632436']Bitcoin mining pool powered by hydropower[/URL] and I'm sure you've seen the President of El Salvador talking about using geothermal energy from the nation's volancos as a solution to the Bitcoin mining energy crisis as well.The point is, progress is being made in this regard and just because Bitcoin mining takes up a lot of energy does not mean it's a ponzi.
Balifrog
Here's the worst thing of many bad things about PonziCoin: Bitcoin's electricity usage is enormous. In November, the power consumed by the entire bitcoin network was estimated to be higher than that of the Republic of Ireland. Since then, its demands have only grown. It's now on pace to use just over 42TWh of electricity in a year, placing it ahead of New Zealand and Hungary and just behind Peru, according to [URL='https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption']estimates from Digiconomist[/URL]. That's commensurate with CO2 emissions of 20 megatonnes - or roughly 1m transatlantic flights. If the fools that want to believe in something that only exists on the hard disk, server or cloud of a computer has any external value then may the power be with them but I would rather bet on pigs flying.Further: Burning huge amounts of electricity isn't incidental to bitcoin: instead, it's embedded into the innermost core of the currency, as the operation known as "mining". In simplified terms, bitcoin mining is a competition to waste the most electricity possible by doing pointless arithmetic quintillions of times a second.This is a winner-takes-all game, where the prize is guaranteed to be paid to one, and only one, miner every 10 minutes. Burning more electricity increases your chances of winning, but correspondingly decreases everyone else's - and so they have a motivation to burn more electricity in turn.PonziCoin indeed?! It should be banned and I'm sure it will be in our Green New World - this idiocy has no place. None![/QUOTE]Strongly disagree !But then again, I am a young, modern thinking guy living in the South of Bali ...If we want to save energy, stop global warming...stop making kids.It's not the cars, the planes that are the problem.... It is the crazy increase in world population over the last 200 years. And all of them wanting a TV, Internet, a car etc ......"In [URL='https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography']demographics[/URL], the [B]world population[/B] is the total number of [URL='https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human']humans[/URL] currently living, and was estimated to have exceeded 7.9 billion people as of November 2021.[URL='https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#cite_note-2'][2][/URL] It took over 2 million years of [URL='https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prehistory']human prehistory[/URL] and [URL='https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_history']history[/URL] for the world's population to reach 1 [URL='https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billion']billion[/URL][URL='https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#cite_note-3'][3][/URL] and only 200 years more to grow to 7 billion.[URL='https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#cite_note-4'][4][/URL]"[URL unfurl="true"]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population[/URL]
Markit
Windmills? Ok Don Quixote, let's talk about that. In [URL='https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aae102']this study[/URL] published by Harvard Researchers, they determined using windmills, in an energy-intensive society with only renewable energy would require vast amounts of land. For example, current demand for electricity in the United States (not including gasoline, fuel, and natural gas as for space heating and fertiliser production) will cover an area twice the size of California with wind turbines.So they are incredibly inefficient, not to mention ugly, contribute to noise pollution and also kill birds as well.As for hydropower, now that is something I can get on board with. in fact, they are already started to build a [URL='https://www.waterpowermagazine.com/news/newsbitcoin-mining-pool-launched-powered-by-hydropower-8632436']Bitcoin mining pool powered by hydropower[/URL] and I'm sure you've seen the President of El Salvador talking about using geothermal energy from the nation's volancos as a solution to the Bitcoin mining energy crisis as well.The point is, progress is being made in this regard and just because Bitcoin mining takes up a lot of energy does not mean it's a ponzi.[/QUOTE]In passing (tilting?) on wind turbines I will only say that your noted study was 4 years old and that it was deemed by its own authors to have been 40% off a year after publishing on its stats making it to my mind completely unreliable although they did gallantly try to blind with science anyone brave enough to attempt to read it."So they are incredibly inefficient, not to mention ugly, contribute to noise pollution and also kill birds as well." All a matter of comparison or the beholder (as in beauty is in the eye of..) The trend is for off-shoring anyway so for those that find them ugly (not me) out of sight, out of mind.Your whole PonziCoin argument is morally and logically questionable: how can it be in the planet's interest to have vast amounts of power, no matter how it is produced, used to run millions of computers calculating madly equations for sums that absolutely nobody wants to know? It reminds me of the Douglas Adams "Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy" where a huge computer is built to calculate the meaning of life and after working for centuries the answer it spit out was 42. Then, of course, they had to build an even bigger and more complicated computer to figure out what that answer meant. Read the book if you haven't or better yet listing to the radio show that it was originally meant to be.
JackStraw
In passing (tilting?) on wind turbines I will only say that your noted study was 4 years old and that it was deemed by its own authors to have been 40% off a year after publishing on its stats making it to my mind completely unreliable although they did gallantly try to blind with science anyone brave enough to attempt to read it."So they are incredibly inefficient, not to mention ugly, contribute to noise pollution and also kill birds as well." All a matter of comparison or the beholder (as in beauty is in the eye of..) The trend is for off-shoring anyway so for those that find them ugly (not me) out of sight, out of mind.Your whole PonziCoin argument is morally and logically questionable: how can it be in the planet's interest to have vast amounts of power, no matter how it is produced, used to run millions of computers calculating madly equations for sums that absolutely nobody wants to know? It reminds me of the Douglas Adams "Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy" where a huge computer is built to calculate the meaning of life and after working for centuries the answer it spit out was 42. Then, of course, they had to build an even bigger and more complicated computer to figure out what that answer meant. Read the book if you haven't or better yet listing to the radio show that it was originally meant to be.[/QUOTE]The environmental impact of Bitcoin mining...which is debatable anyway...is worth it in my opinion. The main advantage of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies is to take the power out of the hands of corrupt central banks to create a peer-to-peer electronic cash system. That alone is worth any temporary environmental damage Bitcoin may cause until more, efficient methods come about. Actually, there are already several other blockchains that are extremely "green." Bitcoin just gets the bulk of the negative headlines since it is the most popular cryptocurrency but I'm in the camp that it will be replaced by these next-generation blockchains that are cheaper, faster, and more energy-efficient.Also, FYI a 2017 [URL='https://coinshares.co.uk/bitcoin-mining-cost/']study conducted by Coinshares[/URL] concludes that renewable energy makes up 78% of total Bitcoin mining energy use, while another recent [URL='https://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/faculty-research/centres/alternative-finance/publications/2nd-global-cryptoasset-benchmarking-study/#.XBI_t2hKhZd']study from the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance[/URL] concludes a conservative overall ~28% use of renewable energy.But I guess since these studies weren't done yesterday, they are "completely unreliable" and try to "blind you with science" which is a funny thing to say coming from you. I guess you didn't care about being blinded by science when you got your vaccine, did you?
RossM
Somebody is planning to send us 10.000 Australian dollars from Australia to Bali, please could you advice us what would be the best way to send that quantity of money?. We have pay pal account but I think the commission is high, I hear a lot about transferwise but never use it.Terimakasi, have a beautiful evening.[/QUOTE]I'm going in a few days, just give it to me, and I'll drop it off to wherever you want it delivered. ;);)
Wolverine
Yes, I second that. But send as Rupiah as if it is exchanged by your bank here the rates might not be so good. Without registering you can immediately see what it would cost and the conversion to Rupiah would be by logging on to transferwise.com . Whatever you do don't transfer using an Australian bank. Lost a lot of money with terrible bank exchange rates.[/QUOTE]Is that Wise or is transferwise a totally different institution?
RossM
Is that Wise or is transferwise a totally different institution?[/QUOTE]Agreed. Send as A$ and convert on arrival, but not through a bank.I think Wise is the same as Transferwise, just a name change. I recall receiving an email telling me of the change.
Metter
Is that Wise or is transferwise a totally different institution?[/QUOTE]I use WISE on a regular basis. The rate is always better than the local money changes and way better than a bank. If I use PayID as the transfer method the money can leave my Commbank account and hit Maybank already converted in 5 minutes during banking hours.
