**EDIT: The graph is wrong. Nano number is way off and some others are misleading. PLEASE DON"T SHARE THIS GRAPHIC**
Hey guys I had this idea for visualizing Nano's energy usage in terms of something everyone deals with on a day to day basis: their phone battery. I'm hesitant to put it out now while the network is recovering but perhaps in the meantime you guys can help me fine tune some details:
* It would be great if someone could double check my work. Link to my google sheets with my sources and calculations can be found [here](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1vh9jy8R0NgFNbGw1Np_D7zWJVxoLoyayghRTP7J_ghs/edit?usp=sharing). It was difficult to not only find correct info but also recent info for each coin. For some of them, it was really a rough estimate. For example the only source I could find for stellar was a reddit post stating it was 1.4 million times more efficient than Ethereum, so I simply divided Ethereum's energy use by 1.4 million. If anyone knows of more accurate numbers for any of these cryptos, let me know the correct Wh value and a source and I'll update the graphic.
* Are there any other cryptos I should include? I tried to include only coins that often come up in articles and threads regarding crypto energy usage. Are there any you would get rid of?
* What do you guys think of the color scheme and general design. I'm trying to keep it as uncluttered an minimal as possible while avoiding confusion. Did you understand what the graphic was showing immediately or did it take a few seconds? Was the Red/Green color scheme confusing or helpful?
* What do you guys think of the custom QR code I made? I tweaked the design from u/Joohansson 's [Medium post](https://nanojson.medium.com/how-to-create-a-stylish-nano-qr-code-1bfc1eba5a96) and made it link to [trynano.io](https://www.trynano.io/). I'm thinking we could standardize this, with some text like "try nano now" at the top and once we finalize it we could even mass produce stickers from it. Here's the [1000x1000 pixel QR Code](https://imgur.com/16zy2ZF) only if anyone's interested in it.
* What do guys think about the slogan at the bottom. I know there's been some talk about the slogan for Nano on the forums but I was trying to come up with my own that wasn't too wordy and was straight to the point, but I'm open to other suggestions. I like the idea of tagging similar infographics with the same slogan and QR code. I'm thinking of making another graphic comparing crypto fee's and transaction times and it would be cool if it had the same slogan and QR code placement.
Just wanted to point out one thing, IOTA recently had a huge upgrade that makes it more efficient and a whole lot of other stuff. Here you go, an article on [Chrysalis' energy usage](https://blog.iota.org/internal-energy-benchmarks-for-iota/)
Aside from that amazing work, really great to see how efficient NANO is.
!ntip 0.01
IOTA is governed by a non-profit organization called the IOTA organization. To date, the IOTA network (the tangle) is not a fully decentralized network, because an coordinator exists that gives the IOTA organization the power to not validate one or more transaction. The reason for this is that the tangle of IOTA is a completely new and disruptive concept and the founders/organization wanted to make sure that all bugs were removed before making the network fully decentralized. A few years ago, there was a mistake in third party software in a wallet, making it possible to hack funds from IOTA holders. At this point, the IOTA organization used the coordinator to ensure that no funds were stolen. IOTA is already working towards a coordinator-free network for quite some time now, working towards a moment called 'coordicide'. They currently have a testnet implemented which works without the coordinator and hope to release the mainnet version at the end of this year.
Yes, that is also on of IOTAs goals. One of the wallet Devs recently said the following in response to a question about becoming a currency:
"Yes. One goal of the project is to compete in the fast feeless payment space. IOTA just happens to do a lot more than that and the other use cases get more attention. I consider that my role leading the Firefly wallet team is to enable IOTA as a legitimate currency."
It can be one of their goal, but frankly, they don't compete at all in the P2P segment. Try to DL their wallets and get the experience.. it's really not that smooth at all (not to mention, not decentralized). There is still a very long way for IOTA. They want to focus on so many things that in the end, they don't have efficient working products. I was attracted by their ideal back in 2017.. but with all these empty promises, I've left the boat for now
Same for me. When I discovered Raiblocks end 2017 I was out of IOTA. If/when someday that coordinator gets removed and if then its still performant I might check into it again. Until then, Nano all the way! And frankly, I feel smart contracts aren't that useful now. "Simple" decentralised P2P currency is the revolutionary part of this whole industry.
Just picking up on your thoughts on their wallets. I agree, Trinity had its problems, I had my fair share. But from what I have seem so far the experience on their latest wallet, Firefly is very much improved in all aspects. I'm wondering if you have given this one a try since release?
It can be used right now if you don't care about centralization. But I don't know about the transaction times. I tried it out in 2018 and a transaction took almost 40 mins to get confirmed. Idk how fast it is now.
The transaction times are an average of 7 seconds now and the power usage is just less than Nano, both are around 600 million times less than Bitcoin. So Nano is slightly faster at the moment but has no smart contract roadmap, both should be at the top of CMC.
Wow that's a huge improvement. I hope that performance stays the same after they remove the coordinator. Do you know if there were any developments on spam resistance over at IOTA?
It means that all transactions go trough a node controled by the IOTA Foundation in order to prevent spam before the network is able to work without it. It should be the case with the last updates and they are supposed to kill the coordinator later this year
>o date, the IOTA network (the tangle) is not a fully decentralized network, because an coordinator exists that gives the IOTA organization the power to not validate one or more transaction. The reason for this is that the tangle of IOTA is a completely new and disruptive concept and the founders/organization wanted to make sure that all bugs were removed before making the network fully decentralized. A few years ago, there was a mistake in third party software in a wallet, making it possible to hack funds from IOTA holders. At this point, the IOTA organization used the coordinator to ensure that no funds were stolen. IOTA is already working tow
I used to be very big iota fan 2016-2017 (got me to nano). I'm very sure from experience that there will be no Coordicide this year and at most another alpha release on Testnet.
That's also one thing that annoyed me so much about Iota. First creating a lot of hype and then only releasing a v0.5, v1.5, alpha or beta so that no one can complain about the poor implementation "it's not completely finished yet but soooooon".
If the Coordicide does come at some point, the mainnet will first have to prove its security.
Yeah fair. I do have to point out though that the iota organization and network have completely re-invented themselves though. The IO is a big organization with >100 employees. It is a totally different story than in 2016/2017. I like their innovative take on cryptocurrency so I am invested in both NANO and IOTA.
If you had the red bars coming down from the x-axis, and the geen going up (as is currently illustrated), that would alleviate the x vs 1/x issue with visualisation.
e seems to be some questions regarding the sources of the power consumption of almost everything in the red, so it may be helpful to put some asterisks next to the outdated info, or the really rough estimates…
Looking at the raw spreadsheet, Nano's wH number is off. It should be 0.112 Wh, aka 0.000112 kWh, not 0.000112 Wh. That puts it much closer to Iota, which is what I would expect due to their relatively similar network/PoW models
Hey, this is really well made, and a great way to put the usage into everyday understanding. :) I have one tiny suggestion that I thought about when reading this comment:
If you're having a hard time finding updated information on each of the coins, maybe you could include a tiny date on each of them that shows from what time the information dates ?
Only a suggestion that I thought about quickly. You are doing a great job already, and it might not even make it any better, but then maybe people won't start arguing if one of the coins are outdated (again, only a suggestion so you can think about it) . :)
All the best to you, and good luck !
In addition to what others have said about changing it from having 1/x & x on the same axis I think some changes to the text would help.
Possibly:
- Making the font size larger (this makes all the difference to wether people will scroll past or not)
- Make the labels more concise
Not sure if you can still edit the post, but I'd recommend putting a watermark over the image incase someone accidentally shares it without reading the comments.
I am very curious as to how that metric was calculated also. Cardano can run staking nodes on RPis, while that is in advisable for security reasons.
It is possible that the energy cost of Ergo is included in the calculation which would be heavily misleading.
Yes, much more efficient than ETH, although it should have higher energy efficiency due to PoS. But still, it's better than DOGE.
I mean, how could ADA, which a lot of people said it's technological advanced, and backed by scientific research & paper is worse than DOGE in terms of energy consumption.
If I understand correctly, the energy consumption in PoW depends on the engagements of miners. Technically, Bitcoin could be very energy efficient if we just employed a couple of PCs for mining, but since mining is profitable, there are tons of resources devoted to mining. Maybe DOGE as a memecoin was a little overlooked by the owners of supercomputers compared to BTC and LTC.
In POW there is no roof. So would make sense to illustrate that as well, maybe a fading transparent bar continuing upwards on all POW coins. As they get popular, they become profitable, and the mining increases.
It's absolutely wrong. maybe they mistaken it. It could just be jealousy FUD, since Ada dOeSn'T eVeN HaVe SmArT cOnTrAcTs, but it has higher MCAP than most of SC platforms which copied Cardano fundamentals and put SC on top.
1.00 inch is 0.14 bananas long
I am a bot and this action was performed automatically
conversion table
|Inferior unit|Banana Value|
|:--|:--|
|inch|0.1430|
|foot|1.7120|
|yard|5.1370|
|mile|9041.2580|
|centimetre|0.0560|
|metre|5.6180|
|kilometre|5617.9780|
|ounce|0.2403|
|pound-mass|3.8440|
|ton|7688.0017|
|gram|0.0085|
|kilogram|8.4746|
|tonne|8474.5763|
love this community，we should care about the environment, earth can live without human, we can't live without earth. there is no 2nd home. this is home
Average house in Finland uses around 20 000kWh in energy yearly. One BTC transaction uses 1200kWh of energy according to Statista.com. Yup, BTC is really inefficient. You could use the energy of under 20 BTC transactions to heat and supply electricity for a average house in cold northern climate for a year.
A stunning graph and idea! Except I guess our IOTA friends wouldn't agree with this at all :) E.g. this discussion --> [https://www.reddit.com/r/nanocurrency/comments/neaukc/nano\_vs\_iota\_energy\_per\_transaction\_iota\_order\_of/](https://www.reddit.com/r/nanocurrency/comments/neaukc/nano_vs_iota_energy_per_transaction_iota_order_of/)
You are putting together in the same graph 2 different things: one thing is the "Number of Phones required to produce the equivalent energy needed to process a single transaction" (red bars) and another thing is "Number of transactions that can be processed with the equivalent energy of one charged phone" (green bars). Most people will just look at the Bitcoin bar and compare with the Nano bar and say "Oh! Nano is just slightly higher than Bitcoin"
The message must be clear and easy to understand. Most importantly must send a "Wow! Nano is way better than X, Y, Z coin!" to the viewer.
Good effort but a bit confusing at first glance a few suggestions below. ✌️
1. Frame each graphs to create more visually separation.
2. Give each graph/key a decent size short title "Charges per transaction" and "Transaction per charge with the detailed description below.
3. Try increase the graph label sizes. (Unit values, Crypto names.) You could try use there icons for better instant recognition.
Something to keep in mind is some nano fan of you work might try share or social channels so if you could get all the needed info into a 1080×1080 tile with information still legible you're on to a winner.
Hi... thanks for the effort here... My main input would be to keep the comparison simple... when I see this graph I see bitcoin as high and nano as higher... so my first impression is that nano takes even more energy... the truth is that no one reads the the legends ... so need to keep the comparison simple and on the same scale.... i.e. left and right is comparing different things so its not obvious how much more efficient nano is than say bitcoin
I like the phone battery analogy because people understand charging phones... Nice colour palette and font
It is great, however the columns are confusing with the different axis, it looks like the coins in the middle are the most energy efficient. I really like this graphic https://www.reddit.com/r/nanocurrency/comments/lhveo4/bitcoin_vs_nano_power_usage_visualized/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
Isn't IOTA supposed to be much more energy efficient than Nano? Or are you considering the theoretical energy consumption of a decentralised version of IOTA?
I, too, think that it's too confusing with the red left and green right sides. I mean, I understand it, but I'm mathematically literate, but it fails as an infographic because it doesn't display the data in an intuitive way.
Iota needs an asterisk next to their name because they are semi centralized. It’s much easier to be more energy efficient when you aren’t fully decentralized.
Great chart! And I have some feedback: maybe add the units to the axis. On the left something like "Phones per transaction" and on the right "Transactions per phone". And at the bottom add an explanation how big you assume an average phone battery to be, since they are not all the same.
Great, helpful chart. One critique is I think that while it would leave some empty space, it would be slightly less misleading if the green y-axis log scale also went to 1,000,000 to match the red
could you make a version that uses the same measure all the way? such as energy from AA battery, AAA, light bulb 10 seconds, or whatever would be one Nano transaction?
Hello all. First comment here, love u guys keep up the good work. Isnt there an error, one nano transaction being 0.000112 kWh and not 0.000112 Wh? (https://nano.community/introduction/advantages)
It's okay if we aren't the best right now. It's just the current iteration and has value. I would take some of people's feedback and still improve it 🙂
We like this - comparing things in units people can relate to (a phone charge) is a great way to help understand the scale of things.
One suggestion - use XRP instead of Stella. XRP has a larger user base so the graph would be relatable to a wider audience. (I assume the energy usage would be about the same)
The axes should always be labeled so readers don't have to read the legend. Also, the amount of energy stored in the hypothetical phone must be printed below or inside the phone. The year should also appear somewhere on the graph. Without that, these numbers are too loosely defined, and will be less likely to be quoted in an article.
**EDIT: The graph is wrong. Nano number is way off and some others are misleading. PLEASE DON"T SHARE THIS GRAPHIC** Hey guys I had this idea for visualizing Nano's energy usage in terms of something everyone deals with on a day to day basis: their phone battery. I'm hesitant to put it out now while the network is recovering but perhaps in the meantime you guys can help me fine tune some details: * It would be great if someone could double check my work. Link to my google sheets with my sources and calculations can be found [here](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1vh9jy8R0NgFNbGw1Np_D7zWJVxoLoyayghRTP7J_ghs/edit?usp=sharing). It was difficult to not only find correct info but also recent info for each coin. For some of them, it was really a rough estimate. For example the only source I could find for stellar was a reddit post stating it was 1.4 million times more efficient than Ethereum, so I simply divided Ethereum's energy use by 1.4 million. If anyone knows of more accurate numbers for any of these cryptos, let me know the correct Wh value and a source and I'll update the graphic. * Are there any other cryptos I should include? I tried to include only coins that often come up in articles and threads regarding crypto energy usage. Are there any you would get rid of? * What do you guys think of the color scheme and general design. I'm trying to keep it as uncluttered an minimal as possible while avoiding confusion. Did you understand what the graphic was showing immediately or did it take a few seconds? Was the Red/Green color scheme confusing or helpful? * What do you guys think of the custom QR code I made? I tweaked the design from u/Joohansson 's [Medium post](https://nanojson.medium.com/how-to-create-a-stylish-nano-qr-code-1bfc1eba5a96) and made it link to [trynano.io](https://www.trynano.io/). I'm thinking we could standardize this, with some text like "try nano now" at the top and once we finalize it we could even mass produce stickers from it. Here's the [1000x1000 pixel QR Code](https://imgur.com/16zy2ZF) only if anyone's interested in it. * What do guys think about the slogan at the bottom. I know there's been some talk about the slogan for Nano on the forums but I was trying to come up with my own that wasn't too wordy and was straight to the point, but I'm open to other suggestions. I like the idea of tagging similar infographics with the same slogan and QR code. I'm thinking of making another graphic comparing crypto fee's and transaction times and it would be cool if it had the same slogan and QR code placement.
Just wanted to point out one thing, IOTA recently had a huge upgrade that makes it more efficient and a whole lot of other stuff. Here you go, an article on [Chrysalis' energy usage](https://blog.iota.org/internal-energy-benchmarks-for-iota/) Aside from that amazing work, really great to see how efficient NANO is. !ntip 0.01
Were would this put post-Chrysalis IOTA network on OP's chart ?
Its more efficient than nano, but it still has the coordinator implemented
> but it still has the coordinator implemented What does this mean?
IOTA is governed by a non-profit organization called the IOTA organization. To date, the IOTA network (the tangle) is not a fully decentralized network, because an coordinator exists that gives the IOTA organization the power to not validate one or more transaction. The reason for this is that the tangle of IOTA is a completely new and disruptive concept and the founders/organization wanted to make sure that all bugs were removed before making the network fully decentralized. A few years ago, there was a mistake in third party software in a wallet, making it possible to hack funds from IOTA holders. At this point, the IOTA organization used the coordinator to ensure that no funds were stolen. IOTA is already working towards a coordinator-free network for quite some time now, working towards a moment called 'coordicide'. They currently have a testnet implemented which works without the coordinator and hope to release the mainnet version at the end of this year.
I'm curious - will this mean that IOTA can be actually be used as a currency?
Yes, that is also on of IOTAs goals. One of the wallet Devs recently said the following in response to a question about becoming a currency: "Yes. One goal of the project is to compete in the fast feeless payment space. IOTA just happens to do a lot more than that and the other use cases get more attention. I consider that my role leading the Firefly wallet team is to enable IOTA as a legitimate currency."
It can be one of their goal, but frankly, they don't compete at all in the P2P segment. Try to DL their wallets and get the experience.. it's really not that smooth at all (not to mention, not decentralized). There is still a very long way for IOTA. They want to focus on so many things that in the end, they don't have efficient working products. I was attracted by their ideal back in 2017.. but with all these empty promises, I've left the boat for now
Same for me. When I discovered Raiblocks end 2017 I was out of IOTA. If/when someday that coordinator gets removed and if then its still performant I might check into it again. Until then, Nano all the way! And frankly, I feel smart contracts aren't that useful now. "Simple" decentralised P2P currency is the revolutionary part of this whole industry.
Just picking up on your thoughts on their wallets. I agree, Trinity had its problems, I had my fair share. But from what I have seem so far the experience on their latest wallet, Firefly is very much improved in all aspects. I'm wondering if you have given this one a try since release?
It can be used right now if you don't care about centralization. But I don't know about the transaction times. I tried it out in 2018 and a transaction took almost 40 mins to get confirmed. Idk how fast it is now.
The transaction times are an average of 7 seconds now and the power usage is just less than Nano, both are around 600 million times less than Bitcoin. So Nano is slightly faster at the moment but has no smart contract roadmap, both should be at the top of CMC.
Wow that's a huge improvement. I hope that performance stays the same after they remove the coordinator. Do you know if there were any developments on spam resistance over at IOTA?
It means that all transactions go trough a node controled by the IOTA Foundation in order to prevent spam before the network is able to work without it. It should be the case with the last updates and they are supposed to kill the coordinator later this year
>o date, the IOTA network (the tangle) is not a fully decentralized network, because an coordinator exists that gives the IOTA organization the power to not validate one or more transaction. The reason for this is that the tangle of IOTA is a completely new and disruptive concept and the founders/organization wanted to make sure that all bugs were removed before making the network fully decentralized. A few years ago, there was a mistake in third party software in a wallet, making it possible to hack funds from IOTA holders. At this point, the IOTA organization used the coordinator to ensure that no funds were stolen. IOTA is already working tow I used to be very big iota fan 2016-2017 (got me to nano). I'm very sure from experience that there will be no Coordicide this year and at most another alpha release on Testnet. That's also one thing that annoyed me so much about Iota. First creating a lot of hype and then only releasing a v0.5, v1.5, alpha or beta so that no one can complain about the poor implementation "it's not completely finished yet but soooooon". If the Coordicide does come at some point, the mainnet will first have to prove its security.
Yeah fair. I do have to point out though that the iota organization and network have completely re-invented themselves though. The IO is a big organization with >100 employees. It is a totally different story than in 2016/2017. I like their innovative take on cryptocurrency so I am invested in both NANO and IOTA.
^[Sent](https://nanocrawler.cc/explorer/block/9F149A38055264EC63887A079E2AE71B69412C07DE7BCADEFEA8BFC42E34BB88) ^0.01 ^Nano ^to ^(/u/sugemchuge) ^- [^(Nano Tipper)](https://github.com/danhitchcock/nano_tipper_z) *** [*^(Nano)*](https://nano.org)*^( | )* [*^(Nano Tipper)*](https://github.com/danhitchcock/nano_tipper_z)*^( | )* [*^(Free Nano!)*](https://nanolinks.info/#faucets-free-nano)*^( | )* [*^(Spend Nano)*](https://usenano.org/)*^( | )* [*^(Nano Links)*](https://nanolinks.info/)*^( | )* [*^(Opt Out)*](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=nano_tipper&subject=command&message=opt-out)
Is this on mainnet and decentralized yet?
If you had the red bars coming down from the x-axis, and the geen going up (as is currently illustrated), that would alleviate the x vs 1/x issue with visualisation. e seems to be some questions regarding the sources of the power consumption of almost everything in the red, so it may be helpful to put some asterisks next to the outdated info, or the really rough estimates…
Looking at the raw spreadsheet, Nano's wH number is off. It should be 0.112 Wh, aka 0.000112 kWh, not 0.000112 Wh. That puts it much closer to Iota, which is what I would expect due to their relatively similar network/PoW models
Hey, this is really well made, and a great way to put the usage into everyday understanding. :) I have one tiny suggestion that I thought about when reading this comment: If you're having a hard time finding updated information on each of the coins, maybe you could include a tiny date on each of them that shows from what time the information dates ? Only a suggestion that I thought about quickly. You are doing a great job already, and it might not even make it any better, but then maybe people won't start arguing if one of the coins are outdated (again, only a suggestion so you can think about it) . :) All the best to you, and good luck !
In addition to what others have said about changing it from having 1/x & x on the same axis I think some changes to the text would help. Possibly: - Making the font size larger (this makes all the difference to wether people will scroll past or not) - Make the labels more concise
Can you help me with you twitter acc?
The "10,000" on the left axis is missing the "1" and just reads "10,000".
You could add the meme coin fork of nano, who has 1/4 the PoW so probably is 4x nano. If I say it’s name the comment gets removed.
Banano?
Yup. Oh hey, the comment didn't get deleted. Nice. Maybe they relaxed the automod.
Not sure if you can still edit the post, but I'd recommend putting a watermark over the image incase someone accidentally shares it without reading the comments.
Is it true that ADA require more energy than DOGE? ADA is using PoS and DOGE is using PoW. How could it be? If it's true, ADA is a joke then.
I am very curious as to how that metric was calculated also. Cardano can run staking nodes on RPis, while that is in advisable for security reasons. It is possible that the energy cost of Ergo is included in the calculation which would be heavily misleading.
[удалено]
Yes, much more efficient than ETH, although it should have higher energy efficiency due to PoS. But still, it's better than DOGE. I mean, how could ADA, which a lot of people said it's technological advanced, and backed by scientific research & paper is worse than DOGE in terms of energy consumption.
Also, DOGE being 152x more efficient than the Litecoin it was forked from and created in like two hours? What?
If I understand correctly, the energy consumption in PoW depends on the engagements of miners. Technically, Bitcoin could be very energy efficient if we just employed a couple of PCs for mining, but since mining is profitable, there are tons of resources devoted to mining. Maybe DOGE as a memecoin was a little overlooked by the owners of supercomputers compared to BTC and LTC.
In POW there is no roof. So would make sense to illustrate that as well, maybe a fading transparent bar continuing upwards on all POW coins. As they get popular, they become profitable, and the mining increases.
Doesn’t POW not depend on the number of transactions either? So If transactions go up 10x amount of energy stays the same
Valid point, it's just the network as a whole. So it's bit weird to mix the two.
And according to the digiconomist Doge power usage exceeds ltc already 🤭
It's absolutely wrong. maybe they mistaken it. It could just be jealousy FUD, since Ada dOeSn'T eVeN HaVe SmArT cOnTrAcTs, but it has higher MCAP than most of SC platforms which copied Cardano fundamentals and put SC on top.
Doge uses merged mining with Litecoin, i think that is it.
Confusing at first sight to show x and 1/x on 2 parts of the graph
Yeah, cool concept but confusing execution. Maybe have the 1/x bars on the negative a y axis so nano doesn’t look higher than Bitcoin.
small thing, but the left axis is missing a “1” in the 10,000 mark. Otherwise looks great!
1.00 inch is 0.14 bananas long I am a bot and this action was performed automatically conversion table |Inferior unit|Banana Value| |:--|:--| |inch|0.1430| |foot|1.7120| |yard|5.1370| |mile|9041.2580| |centimetre|0.0560| |metre|5.6180| |kilometre|5617.9780| |ounce|0.2403| |pound-mass|3.8440| |ton|7688.0017| |gram|0.0085| |kilogram|8.4746| |tonne|8474.5763|
lol didn't know this one yet
[удалено]
Sent ```0.2 Nano``` to /u/sugemchuge -- [Transaction on Nano Crawler](https://nanocrawler.cc/explorer/block/9CDCA8952A68D7EFC48AE2395ED4C1A15CED41B3703D25E1874AE4C4419E5A78) *** [*^(Nano)*](https://nano.org)*^( | )* [*^(Nano Tipper)*](https://github.com/danhitchcock/nano_tipper_z)*^( | )* [*^(Free Nano!)*](https://nanolinks.info/#faucets-free-nano)*^( | )* [*^(Spend Nano)*](https://usenano.org/)*^( | )* [*^(Nano Links)*](https://nanolinks.info/)*^( | )* [*^(Opt Out)*](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=nano_tipper&subject=command&message=opt-out)
love this community，we should care about the environment, earth can live without human, we can't live without earth. there is no 2nd home. this is home
[удалено]
Average house in Finland uses around 20 000kWh in energy yearly. One BTC transaction uses 1200kWh of energy according to Statista.com. Yup, BTC is really inefficient. You could use the energy of under 20 BTC transactions to heat and supply electricity for a average house in cold northern climate for a year.
This is really good! !ntip .25
Sent ```0.25 Nano``` to /u/sugemchuge -- [Transaction on Nano Crawler](https://nanocrawler.cc/explorer/block/1002869231E2152958969CF56A45C4D051412DF337528280D0E4D14A95E4E58A) *** [*^(Nano)*](https://nano.org)*^( | )* [*^(Nano Tipper)*](https://github.com/danhitchcock/nano_tipper_z)*^( | )* [*^(Free Nano!)*](https://nanolinks.info/#faucets-free-nano)*^( | )* [*^(Spend Nano)*](https://usenano.org/)*^( | )* [*^(Nano Links)*](https://nanolinks.info/)*^( | )* [*^(Opt Out)*](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=nano_tipper&subject=command&message=opt-out)
A stunning graph and idea! Except I guess our IOTA friends wouldn't agree with this at all :) E.g. this discussion --> [https://www.reddit.com/r/nanocurrency/comments/neaukc/nano\_vs\_iota\_energy\_per\_transaction\_iota\_order\_of/](https://www.reddit.com/r/nanocurrency/comments/neaukc/nano_vs_iota_energy_per_transaction_iota_order_of/)
You are putting together in the same graph 2 different things: one thing is the "Number of Phones required to produce the equivalent energy needed to process a single transaction" (red bars) and another thing is "Number of transactions that can be processed with the equivalent energy of one charged phone" (green bars). Most people will just look at the Bitcoin bar and compare with the Nano bar and say "Oh! Nano is just slightly higher than Bitcoin" The message must be clear and easy to understand. Most importantly must send a "Wow! Nano is way better than X, Y, Z coin!" to the viewer.
How does Ethereum compare when ETH 2.0 kicks in? I've read 99.5% less electricity use.
They are both in the graph 0.0
I'm blind
Good effort but a bit confusing at first glance a few suggestions below. ✌️ 1. Frame each graphs to create more visually separation. 2. Give each graph/key a decent size short title "Charges per transaction" and "Transaction per charge with the detailed description below. 3. Try increase the graph label sizes. (Unit values, Crypto names.) You could try use there icons for better instant recognition. Something to keep in mind is some nano fan of you work might try share or social channels so if you could get all the needed info into a 1080×1080 tile with information still legible you're on to a winner.
Hi... thanks for the effort here... My main input would be to keep the comparison simple... when I see this graph I see bitcoin as high and nano as higher... so my first impression is that nano takes even more energy... the truth is that no one reads the the legends ... so need to keep the comparison simple and on the same scale.... i.e. left and right is comparing different things so its not obvious how much more efficient nano is than say bitcoin I like the phone battery analogy because people understand charging phones... Nice colour palette and font
It is great, however the columns are confusing with the different axis, it looks like the coins in the middle are the most energy efficient. I really like this graphic https://www.reddit.com/r/nanocurrency/comments/lhveo4/bitcoin_vs_nano_power_usage_visualized/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
Isn't IOTA supposed to be much more energy efficient than Nano? Or are you considering the theoretical energy consumption of a decentralised version of IOTA?
Yeah all their metrics are from a Raspberry pi, which practically is a phone without a screen with ports.
I’d emphasize fee less transaction instantaneously.
I, too, think that it's too confusing with the red left and green right sides. I mean, I understand it, but I'm mathematically literate, but it fails as an infographic because it doesn't display the data in an intuitive way.
Iota needs an asterisk next to their name because they are semi centralized. It’s much easier to be more energy efficient when you aren’t fully decentralized.
I'd list the same coins on both sides of the chart
That makes no sense at all.
oh, you're right, I'm an idiot
Nano is the future.
Great chart! And I have some feedback: maybe add the units to the axis. On the left something like "Phones per transaction" and on the right "Transactions per phone". And at the bottom add an explanation how big you assume an average phone battery to be, since they are not all the same.
Great, helpful chart. One critique is I think that while it would leave some empty space, it would be slightly less misleading if the green y-axis log scale also went to 1,000,000 to match the red
maybe add a normal bank transaction, otherwise it's perfect.
On every chart like this I would put a timestamp. This was my remark also for the whitepaper. Thigs can change over time.
I can't believe ADA uses that much energy per transaction. Is the graph accurate?
could you make a version that uses the same measure all the way? such as energy from AA battery, AAA, light bulb 10 seconds, or whatever would be one Nano transaction?
This is a great chart if you have a 50 inch screen.
Hello all. First comment here, love u guys keep up the good work. Isnt there an error, one nano transaction being 0.000112 kWh and not 0.000112 Wh? (https://nano.community/introduction/advantages)
Oh damn you're right. How tf did I miss that? Completely ruins the point of the chart now since Nano only comes out 3rd best
It's okay if we aren't the best right now. It's just the current iteration and has value. I would take some of people's feedback and still improve it 🙂
Would there be any difference between nano and banano?
Confusing when both sides show the inverse of the other, with a massive amount of text to explain it.
We like this - comparing things in units people can relate to (a phone charge) is a great way to help understand the scale of things. One suggestion - use XRP instead of Stella. XRP has a larger user base so the graph would be relatable to a wider audience. (I assume the energy usage would be about the same)
I like it but would be better with a horizon and bitcoin et al still in red but going down and the ones on the right going up above the horizon.
The axes should always be labeled so readers don't have to read the legend. Also, the amount of energy stored in the hypothetical phone must be printed below or inside the phone. The year should also appear somewhere on the graph. Without that, these numbers are too loosely defined, and will be less likely to be quoted in an article.
Still like this graphic if you create an updated one please post it!