If it uses many orders of magnitudes more energy per transaction than all the existing ways of people sending money to each other, it's being peed away.

It's worse than that; there is essentially no relationship between the amount of transactions processed and the total amount of actual energy burned so the system is obviously wasteful (compared to other systems where e.g. less transactions = less energy spent)

Sure, but estimates for marginal energy costs for bitcoin transactions sit at around 150-250 kWh.

A 310L fridge [1] (random one I found) for context uses about 280 kWh per year [2].

I think it's pretty ridiculous to say that the average bitcoin transaction provides approximately half the value (in the best case scenario) as having the ability to refrigerate food for a year. I'd say "pissing away" is a pretty fair comparison.

[1] https://www.lg.com/au/fridges/lg-GB-310RPL

[2] http://www.energyrating.gov.au/calculator

With [2] you will need to put the model number in the "Brand or Model" box

And coal power shouldn't be replaced as long as it helps people have electricity. /s

Your comment misses the point that it is still a monumental and needless waste.

It's being used to help people send money to each other very very very inefficiently.

As someone else in this thread pointed out, there's only 500,000 active Bitcoin addresses, and yet the Bitcoin network consumes the same amount of electricity as the entire country of Denmark

> It is being used to help people send money to each other.

Probably 95% of it is being used for speculation/gambling and scamming the uninformed. 4% on drugs, and 1% on anything else. I'm being generous here. Bitcoin advocates are pool sharks, they want the rest of the world to be their marks.

Who the hell pays rent with bitcoin? Who buys groceries with bitcoin? Bitcoin could drop off the face of the earth this instant and I wouldn't shed a tear.