Can Safe Network become the Green alternative to Bitcoin?

Yes, and every order of magnitude is worth it at this point.

We do have an infinite source of power. It is called the sun.

There are huge leaps forward right now in solar, price and efficiencies; and the problem of storing the suns energy for night time and down time has been solved too.

There are now many different ways to collect the solar energy through solar windows, and even a kind of paint that can be used to collect the energy, which means you could turn your entire house into a power generator.

Granted these technologies are new, and need to be perfected, and implemented. But It is now cheaper to generate electricity with wind and solar than with coal.

There is also more than just wind and solar coming online in the future.

Fusion power is actually a thing now. and there has been small scale experiments in creating electricity with fusion, but that will probably be coming online in the next 20 years. There is a potential tidal ocean generator too, thermal generators, and water batteries.

So It is only a matter of time for renewables to take over. until then we need the safe network for more orders of magnitude.

1 Like

Several exist already - I was part of a small team working on small scale “personal” tidal generator codename Tidal Spark - units before the UK govt pulled the plug on all renewable subsidies and killed the project. Tests had already started in the Denny Ship Tank. Each unit would have been ~3m long and would provide power for a small house - a 3 bedroom semi would likely have needed two such units. Placed in water too deep for paddling and too shallow for trawling with a tidal stream >2kts for 16/24 hrs. Many units all up and down the coast do that slackwater time affected different “fleets” at different times each day. One of our problems was the inefficiencies involved in AC -=>DC power to shore then DC =>AC conversion to hook to the grid. A underwater hub that would use the power from several units to mine BTC was already being considered in 2015 before we had to shelve the project. Also 2-300m of ethernet cable is cheaper than copper wire carrying tens of amps and the insulation/sheilding required is much less. Yes wi-fi links were considered as well :slight_smile:
Obligatory Ayrshire content - There is a constant circular current runs clockwise around the Cumbrae Islands in the Clyde. Had we got further this would have been one of our testing sites.


I am sure this was the case at some point. Just like the argument that gold mining uses (or probably used to use now) more energy than farming BTC. However, that’s not good enough as any additional waste = waste. Rather than ignoring the elephant in the room, projects who work towards a greener alternative will benefit in the long run, and their investors also. I am not a BTC hater and still hold it but I hope to see more green projects as well the number 1 project to overtake BTC to be its Green alternative.


Very cool, and interesting, I didn’t know this. There is a-lot going on with renewables these day, even in Northern oil country Texas style Canadian provinces like Alberta, there is a solar boom starting there now.

1 Like

Tidal Spark is a wee Scottish in-joke

Vital Spark was the boat - a “puffer” immortalised in the stories of Neil Munro Vital Spark - Wikipedia

Some folk took the concept of “merch” just too far with this…

1 Like

From re-reading the white paper around 2017 (and forum stuff on here) pretty sure the supply will unlock as the network grows. I.e. the more users there are utilising the network, the more tokens should be minted (but never breaching the max supply limit). This should create some inflation but still allow the price to grow significantly. I am sure the SNT team will correct me if my memory is wrong or if the plan has changed since. I remember there were haters at one point because they didn’t realise that the inflation would only kick in with significant adoption and the price of the token would still grow significantly.


There’s also been talk recently of possible dbl farming rate early on.
Clearly this would cause inflation.
I very much hope it does not happen.

1 Like

Proof of waste. That is pithy and I immediately get the point.

Providing security by doing useful tasks is absolutely better. This is what safe network can deliver and it is a huge deal, imo.

It seems that some sort of work is required to provide security, so using that useful work should be the goal. We then kill 2 birds with 1 stone.

Edit: Security as a byproduct of doing something useful, rather than security being the only product.

1 Like

This discussion is running afoul of “the efficiency paradox”. Typically, as a technology becomes more efficient the total resources consumed increase because the number of users that can now afford to access the tech go up exponentially.

Safe will end up consuming way more energy than bitcoin ever did. Orders of magnitude more.

Maybe, but it depends what it displaces. Bitcoin has displaced virtually nothing yet for all that energy burned.


No. it doesn’t require all this energy. The amount of energy input into bitcoin is directly proportional to the value given to it on the current markets for a mixture of energy costs, wafer fabrication, bitcoin trade markets etc.

You can fork bitcoin on your laptop and run the exact same software. The code has no value though as you cant match the difficulty of the global bitcoin network.

If it uses more energy than the market values against it, then it will have miners switched off and the difficulty will drop…

I hope whatever farming algorithm is ultimately implemented is smooth and continuous if it is a function of time (or equivalent). The BTC “halvings” drive activity and price cycles that I don’t think is entirely healthy.

1 Like

That also isnt how energy works. Energy storage is terribly lagging. Most plants produce excess energy a lot and if you look at offshore energy farms, if its excess its literally dumped into the sea. You need excess to stop blackouts. Its about harvesting this unused energy and converting it into a portable storage form that can teleport to a more useful economic need.

Oh gawd not this again. That’s literally not how energy transportation works. You can’t teleport energy.

1 Like

I didnt say energy transportation. Its transporting economic value. You cant magically transport excess energy without infrastructure to support it lol.

(weird I could not add a reply to an existing post and could not repost without changing the body.)


There’s a theory the four year cycle is to allow overlap for miners to adapt their mining equipment given Moore’s law which apparently would be CPU improvements about every two years. Not sure if that holds water or not.

1 Like

In the video Kevin O’Leary mentions some perspectives that are relevant to quite a few organizations. From what I see (in western Europe at least), organizations are under mandate (from board level, strategy, owners) to achieve 2030/2050 sustainability goals.

Reaching the goals entails difficult reorganizations, changes to core business processes, and so on. Any proposed change that is able to clearly demonstrate its Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) achievement potential has a higher probability of being accepted.

There are very clear sustainability benefits to Safe Network. If we were able to express these in the United Nations SDG framwork, significant “resistance to change” would disappear, at least on the organizational level, where SDG is the reference standard. Organizational demand for Safe Network might not be a first priority, but in terms of profiling and marketing, SDG has traction, relevance, and constancy. It would provide a good profile of the project to people outside the “cryptosphere”.

For example:


How so???

Because of the sheer number of nodes that will be there? Easily 10 to 100 million nodes. At the minimum of 5 watts that could be 500MW, but the average is more likely to be 100 W each and that is 10 GW.

If average is 200 W then 20 GW total. 200W average is unlikely and if phones can be nodes then definitely not that high.

What is the usage by Bitcoin, I don’t know

But if much of people’s storage and internet will be on there you also have to consider other servers and service providers (e.g. amazon, google etc) not running as many servers.